To "rock fans", what is meant to be the canonical, everyone can agree on, album of the decade?

dude, using actual people that i talk to as an example is the exact opposite of strawmanning. calling it "what rock dads agree on." and "the narrow-minded loudmouth jerk skew factor" is straw man 101.

also i think the whole idea of broadening the definition of rock implies a certain bias towards the results you are looking for.

agreed taht "narrow-minded jerk loudmouth" was a cruel strawman. but i calls em as i sees em. if the people yr. talking about are super open-minded, gentle and thoughtful in how they construct and deconstruct "rock", lemme know. strawman i was objecting to is the reduction of rock fans to the guitar store crowd. that demo is a legit and often vocal subset of rock fans, but they are not by any means the whole deal.

not sure about that last point. looking at the 00s, completely independent of gaydioheads, i see a broadening and intermingling of scenes and sounds -- this becoming super apparent only in the last few years.

that's not an attempt to open the door for kid a, just an observation based on what seems to be going on

agreed taht "narrow-minded jerk loudmouth" was a cruel strawman. but i calls em as i sees em. if the people yr. talking about are super open-minded, gentle and thoughtful in how they construct and deconstruct "rock", lemme know.

you are still strawmanning though, creating a not open-minded, ungentle, unthoughtful group of people that are incapable of "deconstructing" rock that fail to see "Kid A" as a rock album. all i am saying is that i know lots of regular joe strawman style rock dudes that couldn't give a fuck about kid a, and i know a lot of music-critic big ear strawman dudes that think "Kid A" is shit hot awesome, but because it is a "important album" not an "important rock album".

I read two thirds of this thread and my eyes went blurry, so I say

Actually, I'd probably say "Hybrid Theory" by Linkin Park.

― kingkongvsgodzilla, Wednesday, February 18, 2009 8:09 AM

jjj: i admit the strawmanning, somewhat regretfully. but i've spent enough time in & around guitar stores to have opinions, as you do. i'm a way overcommitted rock geek, but guitar store dudes (this unfair generalization i've formed based on experiences & interactions, good & bad) aren't exactly my tribe. some are, some aren't, and i don't mean any of this personally. same goes music-critic big ear strawman dudes, though, yeah, i stray more in that direction.

that said, i realize i've said some dickish shit here, esp in that post you just quoted. regretted it as soon as i hit submit. i have this concept that NOT ALL but a fair contingent of guitar store dudes and guitar magazine voters are sort of proud to be somewhat narrow-minded in defense of rock. this may be bullshit, but it's this impression i've gathered. what i'm observing & describing has nothing to do with intelligence or capacity or any of that shit: it's a shared vision, an ethos. rock doesn't need to be "constructed or deconstructed". it just IS. shit either is or isn't rock. metalheads stray in this direction, too, and the metalhead/guitar store crossover is huge. or seems to be (again, my impression only)

in using non-rock language like "gentle and thoughful" i was kinda trying to poke wink-wink holes in my own strawman, for lols. guess that didn't come across.

lol louis and DJ, yeah i could sit here and post shit off like the first blind shake record and all this other obscure shit i like but they are not going to be canonized.

― Yo, I just copped dat brand new Manity Kane cd. (M@tt He1ges0n), Wednesday, February 18, 2009 8:13 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

i know what you did last nite...

mommy, how iz cannon formed?

what iz rawk?

this man may have an answer:

http://www.dickdestiny.com/arroganceblog.jpg

the whole rock-or-unrock question is b.s. to begin with: suicde is rock bcz it was influenced by rockabilly but soft cell isnt rock bcz it was influenced by suicide?

also i know whole swathes of diehard rockists that consider white stripes as indie scum...and this is in michigan, mind you...and quite a few who can't stand kid rock or linkin park or nickelback. they might like kid a if they listened to it, just bcz of how trippy it is, but maybe not...

(kid a was more in league with the college-stoner crowds I encountered...not so much the diehard grunge leftovers I hung out with in high school & after dropping out of college...)

'in league' is a poor word choice there...i meant something more along the lines of 'catered to'

but that's neither here nor there, bcz what this thread really allows me to do is to plug some of my favourite albums of the decade...

here's two more with rock signifiers that I really like:

http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h279/juicyfrt/51Syp8o1r8L__SL500_AA280_.jpg

this one is fantastic; might make my top 10

http://i66.photobucket.com/albums/h279/juicyfrt/51qWzsTPOdL__SL500_AA280_.jpg

this one not quite as great, but still lots of fun...

also I think Chuck is otm wr2 White Stripes having so many albums so as to split the competition (I wd vote for de Stijl (plus awes non album covers like Jolene and Party of Special Things to Do!)) though I think as a whole Elephant has much more chance making top 5 lists than Is This It? (or the Marshall Mathers LP, which will scare & shame critics with its rampant alleged misogyny-homophobia into placing it lower than prolley wd have been expected say eight years ago...)

love secret wars, not as much as each one teach one, but luv still = luv

each one teach one is another on the to-get list (if only a bit farther down), but "winter shaker"....damn.

oh damn that clinic album is so good

honest answer? there isn't one cause Jack White never bothered to manufacture one. that said, my money's on Marshall Mathers.

xps

nice mekons-ish cover on that Oneida disc.

the whole rock-or-unrock question is b.s. to begin with: suicde is rock bcz it was influenced by rockabilly but soft cell isnt rock bcz it was influenced by suicide?

yeah it IS b.s. but it's b.s. that's true.

like i can't give you some smart guy answer, all reasoned out, why suicide is rock and soft cell isn't...but it's just a fact. like it's cold outside or it's not. or it's raining or not.

^ more inclined to side w this than the "bends is rock but kid a is not" argument. rock, like metal, isn't strictly a matter of sound/instrumentation. it's a culture as much as anything else

which is a not-terribly-smart, half-reasoned answer. soft cell weren't "of rock". that's not where they were coming from, who they were speaking to, or what they were talking about. kraftwerk sit somewhere in the middle.

I think the biggest issue in this thread is whether "rock fans" means "average guitar-store rock dudes" or merely "rockists."

and I can agree with that...Suicide brought certain aspects of rock into Silver Apples-type minimalist-techno,a nd then Soft Cell took it out (replacing it with Motown prhaps?) so Soft Cell consciously veered away from what Vega & Rev were doing in that sense...but it gets very very amorphous when you try to distill the rock from all of its practicioners and turn it into its own sustainable entity...Suicide is unquestionably rock, and so is Amon Duul II, but you take out all the unrock elements of the two bands and get down to their true rock essence and youre still dealing with apples &oranges...you get me?

xpost whats the difference jay?

but you take out all the unrock elements of the two bands and get down to their true rock essence and youre still dealing with apples &oranges...you get me?

yah, 100% i wanted to 2nd guess myself on the "rock is a culture" bit for exactly that reason. it's more like a bunch of cultures - sometimes cooperative, sometimes hostile - loosely grouped under a very tattered banner. which makes it easy to sort out in a fuzzy logic sort of way, but hard to nail down foursquare once and for all.

xpost

average guitar store rock dudes don't waste this much time thinking about whether or not soft cell was rock or not?

AGSRD, what's on yr ipod?

don't need a weather man to tell who's a eurodisco fag, don't follow leaders, watch your parking meters, etc etc

http://konsyenz.files.wordpress.com/2008/05/hoobastank-the-reason.jpg

Major LOLs at the Hoobastank album cover.

note: UK magazine Classic Rock listed Linkin Park's Hybrid Theory at #72 on its 100 greatest rock albums of all time list

xpost I think that there is a certain element of condescension implicit in thinking that the "average stoner rock dude"'s tastes are not the result of the same deliberate choices that any self-respecting aesthete has to make, and speaking of 'rockism' and my admitted hair-splitting in derogatory tones is a half-successful attempt in hiding that condescension...

and while Hoobastank makes a great punchline I think its off the mark in a way that only reinforces my opinion...there isn't that many average stoner rock dudes jamming out to "The Reason"...

^i wouldn't argue with that at all.

there's a certain amount of condescension implicit in posting on this messageboard really.

(also average guitar STORE dudes vs. average stoner rock dudes is different camps IMO)

xpost i'm actually going to retract this statement, as I am not as much up for debating this point as I thought I was...um just because some people read mags and blogs and buys weird music bcz of that, and other people are satisfied with listening to what they encounter on the radio, doesn't mean that anybody is snobz...

as far as condescension = ILM..I certainly have had moments where I comport myself as being God's gift to rockcriticism...

xpost whats the difference jay?

Guitar-store dudes are a subset of rockists. This question is more interesting to me if we're talking about rockists as a whole, and especially those who are actually in the business of canon building -- like Rolling Stone and the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame -- rather than some strawman who frequents guitar stores and listens exclusively to rock radio. I'm less interested in which Tool or QOTSA album that sort of person likes best and more in what this decade's Nevermind or OK Computer is going to turn out to be on an greatest-albums-of-all-time list in 2020.

(also average guitar STORE dudes vs. average stoner rock dudes is different camps IMO)

and this is very much close to what I wz saying as far as some of my friends think White Stripes as arty fagz....

oh so Jay ur taking the thread srsly then?

1 Kid A
2 Speakerboxx/Love Below
3 Yankee Hotel Foxtrot
4 Elephant
5 some MIA album

dark horse: Silent Shout

i've been condescending as hell on this thred (plus aspie, reactionary, etc), but it's hard not to be when yr geeking out. who the fuck listens to hoobastank? agree that the distinction m@tt's making -- gtr store dudez vs. stonar rock dudez -- is worth observing, tho it's a mighty fine beard-hair to split

actually more interesting question: is it bcz theyre rock albums that OK & Nevermind are era-defining? is there something inherently rockist about defining a decade with a couple of albums? (well, duh) see it seems that...

Ok & Nevermind: Albums of the 90s = I love the 90s = tacky nostalgia =popism? (tho I wdnt know fer sure what that word means)

(ps i'm totally bluffing about The Knife...I havent heard it...I told you I dropped off the face for a minute...)

I don't think I know any average stoner rock dudes my age tbh unless you count the kids who still listen to Dave Matthews Band

Albums of the 90s = I love the 90s

This connection seems weak. Part of their canonical status derives from the fact that they're considered "timeless," whereas I Love the '90s suggests a "lol 90s" attitude toward something.

contenderizer uve been saying lots of good stuff. my main point wz that the choices one makes in order to become a rockist and in order to become an average rock fan are parallel to the point of being nearly identical, save that option #1 involves more reading and opinions and stuff...why shouldnt average stoner dudes be rockists? that was all i was saying...

yeah but making them rep for a decade works against their canon timelessness

(xpost to jay)

even though I am a college-age male rock fan I am totally out of touch with what the average college-age male rock fan listens to. my friends all listen to different things it seems like.

1 Kid A
2 Speakerboxx/Love Below
3 Yankee Hotel Foxtrot
4 Elephant
5 some MIA album

dark horse: Silent Shout

― Drugs A. Money

serious? cuz one of the fun things about this thread is trying to draw (or vaguely imply) some totally indefensible line in the sand between "rock albums, specifically" and the larger pop context that those so-called rock albums occur in. the fact that this game is impossible but can still be played is the challenging, interesting part.

i say that cuz i think what yr. doing is more like listing a big tent pazz/jop canon, with some radio rockist emphasis, rolling stone style. a much less tricky prospect, and on that level i'm with you. throw in the marshall mathers LP, discovery, rock steady, maybe a WTF drone metal album for texture, et voila.

BUT WHAT R THE ROCK RECORDS? (check the guy's rock record)

yeah but making them rep for a decade works against their canon timelessness

Well, there's a difference between "best album of the decade" vs. "album most representative of the decade." I guess I thought we were talking primarily about the former.

the choices one makes in order to become a rockist and in order to become an average rock fan are parallel to the point of being nearly identical, save that option #1 involves more reading and opinions and stuff.

Sure, but what it comes down to for me is whether we're trying to identify this decade's Nevermind or this decade's Dirt.

jay was talking abt canon...right now tha top 5 list is what i thought was most likely to go canon...for the most part all I've been trying to do is find cool maybe-overlooked rock records and building up some buzz for them for the inevitable end-of-decade poll, lest they get forgotten...i've been dropping hints of making a end-of-decade list around these parts for a little while now; i'm wondering if Dom wasnt taking the piss out of me when he fired up this lulzthread...

is there something inherently rockist about defining a decade with a couple of albums?

― Drugs A. Money

not necessarily. what i've been doing here is trying to suss out (project, imagine) what ppl a few years/decades down the line will think of the 00s, think of "rock", think of the relationship btwn the 2, and how they'll solidify those conceptions in a canon. it's not a totally imaginary enterprise, cuz you can see the groundwork for future understandings being laid in the now.

that's why i've been trying to maintain some kind of critical distance, to de-emphasize what i think the decade "should" be remembered for (what it would be remembered for if everybody was as smart & perspicacitated as me), and to concentrate instead on observable history-creep.