Middle page features in papers; Newsnight review with John Harris and Paul
Morley; the Internet background story,-And: a slot on The News At Ten. Fastest selling debut ever?
I'm presuming they're not a Dissensus delicacy, but there certainly seems
some media fueled moodshift lurking based on their popularity. The last time a band was on the news was BritPop wasn't it?
Having just read Rip It Up, there are obviously some differences between that era and now, (some of which have probably already been covered somewhere on here) but the ones that are obvious, i think, in the Arctic Monkeys context, are:
(1) The musical climate of then being fueled by a blank slate policy. Punk sweeping away Rocks historical baggage, so that there was a space to rush into; create the sound of the future. Not only has Rock regained a bulging sackful of baggage, but the sound has been peeled away from any social imperitive or thrust, which is not to say that it is not representative, but unradical because the (admittedly youth based) social framework from which it has materialised is itself, unpolitical, unradical, and fractured. (Colleges, Universities included.)
Media (net, magazines, radio, tv, MP3) has also proliferated to such an extent that there is no central timeline or narrative. There are several hundred narratives based on the (2) reissue industry, the vastness of the internet, the fact that MP3 technology allows you to enter the past, present or future at the jog of a wheel. Cultural inheritance can quickly become post-modernised, aesthetically laboured. The Sound Of Yorkshire , (Independent) is actually the the sound (not including the lyrics here, thats where a contradiction comes in i think) of everywhere or anywhere. This might explain the net popularity of genres like Reggaeton, Baile Funk, Grime, etc. Because, sonically, its still on a timeline. It most definitely comes from somewhere. Specific places: Puerto Rico, Rio De Janeiro, East London.
I suppose my main questions as to the opinions of the board would be: How is it that something that sounds so old can be feted so across the board as the latest craze, particularly relating to that contradiction between the sound of A.M and the lyrical observation. (Which i really like~)
What does it mean for a&r and the music industry and the teenagers of the next few years that rock has received yet another lick of paint to tart up the old corpse? How implicit are media such as the NME compared to the glory days of which Reynolds touchs upon in Rip and also new tiers of media such as OMM/ Sunday Supplements?
Also, just to add, I don't want to slate Arctic Monkeys, but am interested in the source and peripheral effect of the phenomenon. They are only young lads after all,(part of their appeal i think) starting out making music, and its worrying enough as to how the media blitz might effect them being so young.
cheers.
Morley; the Internet background story,-And: a slot on The News At Ten. Fastest selling debut ever?
I'm presuming they're not a Dissensus delicacy, but there certainly seems
some media fueled moodshift lurking based on their popularity. The last time a band was on the news was BritPop wasn't it?
Having just read Rip It Up, there are obviously some differences between that era and now, (some of which have probably already been covered somewhere on here) but the ones that are obvious, i think, in the Arctic Monkeys context, are:
(1) The musical climate of then being fueled by a blank slate policy. Punk sweeping away Rocks historical baggage, so that there was a space to rush into; create the sound of the future. Not only has Rock regained a bulging sackful of baggage, but the sound has been peeled away from any social imperitive or thrust, which is not to say that it is not representative, but unradical because the (admittedly youth based) social framework from which it has materialised is itself, unpolitical, unradical, and fractured. (Colleges, Universities included.)
Media (net, magazines, radio, tv, MP3) has also proliferated to such an extent that there is no central timeline or narrative. There are several hundred narratives based on the (2) reissue industry, the vastness of the internet, the fact that MP3 technology allows you to enter the past, present or future at the jog of a wheel. Cultural inheritance can quickly become post-modernised, aesthetically laboured. The Sound Of Yorkshire , (Independent) is actually the the sound (not including the lyrics here, thats where a contradiction comes in i think) of everywhere or anywhere. This might explain the net popularity of genres like Reggaeton, Baile Funk, Grime, etc. Because, sonically, its still on a timeline. It most definitely comes from somewhere. Specific places: Puerto Rico, Rio De Janeiro, East London.
I suppose my main questions as to the opinions of the board would be: How is it that something that sounds so old can be feted so across the board as the latest craze, particularly relating to that contradiction between the sound of A.M and the lyrical observation. (Which i really like~)
What does it mean for a&r and the music industry and the teenagers of the next few years that rock has received yet another lick of paint to tart up the old corpse? How implicit are media such as the NME compared to the glory days of which Reynolds touchs upon in Rip and also new tiers of media such as OMM/ Sunday Supplements?
Also, just to add, I don't want to slate Arctic Monkeys, but am interested in the source and peripheral effect of the phenomenon. They are only young lads after all,(part of their appeal i think) starting out making music, and its worrying enough as to how the media blitz might effect them being so young.
cheers.