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

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.

also jay: lotsa Dirt fans are Nevermind fans (and vice versa; Dirt's a pretty good record*)

*(tho I'm wondering if its a pop record; it gets by mainly on its radio-ready singles...)

contenderizer you might be right...sry if most of my rock-isnt-a-word bs rhetoric is sucking the fun out of the thread...

I remember in 2001 VH1 was all like "Creed: the future of rock???"

The death knell of being able to answer this question honestly must have come well before OK Computer cos that record is okay at best and it's still considered a touchstone

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.

― jaymc

see, i'm coming at this from a very different direction. although it's relevant, i'm not talking about or the former AT ALL. i'm sort of talking about the latter, but primarily in terms of how "the canon" will conceptualize the decade, influencing the selection of represeners. in making my case for kid A, i leaned heavily on why i think it's representative -- but i did this only to suggest that this built-in representativeness gives it a leg up in the canonization process.

I remember in 2001 VH1 was all like "Creed: the future of rock???"

― on some charter shit no doubt (Curt1s Stephens), Thursday, February 19, 2009 1:40 PM (1 minute ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

no they werent

vidz or it didnt happen

the list contenderizer posted earlier is pretty OTM - think viva la vida prob belongs on there too

maybe it was 2000

also jay: lotsa Dirt fans are Nevermind fans (and vice versa; Dirt's a pretty good record*)

Oh, no doubt. I'm not claiming these are separate groups, nor even implying anything about the quality of each record, just that one is canonized and the other isn't, for better or worse.

I don't remember exactly what was said but I remember the words "future of rock music" were spoken over a vid of Scott Stapp in full-on Christ mode soaring over the crowd with 3d revolving camera effects and dramatic guitar wranglin'

damn I'm actually getting nostalgic for those early '00s music video gimmicks now

I'm not claiming these are separate groups, nor even implying anything about the quality of each record, just that one is canonized and the other isn't, for better or worse.

― jaymc

not so sure about that. in the overall critical canon, nirvana shines from on high, but in the more contentious rockist trenches, the difference between the two isn't quite as vast.

to put my last post another way, i'm talking about the "best of the decade" and "representative of the decade" as though they're two sides of the same coin. dirt and nevermind have both been canonized, though in different ways.

knee-jerk "yr talkin bout ROCK lolz" thing is weird

but jay did Nevermind only gain access to the rockist canon? I know it's kind of unhip right now to namedrop Nirvana, but certainly their contributions to popular music have been universally acknowledged at least?

or do rockists not like Dirt? is that what ur saying?

knee-jerk "yr talkin bout ROCK lolz" thing is weird

me?

Honestly I think Coldplay are probably the band we're looking for here even if I & other ppl here aren't fans.

no, not u, drugz. just something that's come up here and there on the thread

yeah, Kid A is so representative that it couldn't even win the P&J poll in its year of release.

oh yeah I guess Kid A would probably work too wouldn't it