Arguing with Rockists
- Thread starter Slothrop
- Start date
"Rockist" seems to have two meanings that I've picked up. One that's disparaging, where rockism is seen as an outdated, almost conservative value system that clings to rock traditonalism, and is associated with people who prefer music that's played by "real" musicians. The other take on rockism is kind of an anti-PoMo attitude (in that it discerns, even as it's eclectic), that reclaims some of the rockist values of innovation and artistic authenticity, but follows them into other advancements in music besides rock, in fact it would probably be bored with traditional rock being made at this point, and would certainly not require "real" musicianship. Innovation, creativity and vitality would probably be it's top virtues. Maybe "avant-gardism" is a better name for it. Or "Dissensian." 
edit:though in hind sight I was kind of leaving out the whole "ethical" element of the popist/rockist argument, my second rockist definition only pertained to my own personal definition of "authenticity" (in that something is fresh or culturally or artisically relevant and not 77th generation imitation)... Holding music to some kind of political or ethical standard is preferable, but I'm not as hung up on it as much as I'm concerned with aesthetic "bravery"... which might be a popist attitude in that it seems "amoral." Rather it's that while I prefer there aren't hateful lyrics or bad cultural/political/idealogical associations (and do ignore some music because of those things), good ethics and politics of course don't make music good or "authentic" either. (don't mind me, I find this stuff much more interesting and relevant then it probably is)
edit:though in hind sight I was kind of leaving out the whole "ethical" element of the popist/rockist argument, my second rockist definition only pertained to my own personal definition of "authenticity" (in that something is fresh or culturally or artisically relevant and not 77th generation imitation)... Holding music to some kind of political or ethical standard is preferable, but I'm not as hung up on it as much as I'm concerned with aesthetic "bravery"... which might be a popist attitude in that it seems "amoral." Rather it's that while I prefer there aren't hateful lyrics or bad cultural/political/idealogical associations (and do ignore some music because of those things), good ethics and politics of course don't make music good or "authentic" either. (don't mind me, I find this stuff much more interesting and relevant then it probably is)
Last edited:
east
Member
Swears is right when saying that Rockism exists in all musical genres. White techno fans are often particularly guilty of it, focusing on Detroit as this tough city in order to give some kind of social authenticity to the music. The whole emphasis on Jeff Mills' live skills is yet another example (just watch the over-keen fanboys surrounding him at Lost - Yngwie Malmsteen would die for that level of scrutiny)
I'm just waiting for the day that Derrick May tosses a Stanton cartridge into the crowd after a set. If it hasn't already happened!
I'm just waiting for the day that Derrick May tosses a Stanton cartridge into the crowd after a set. If it hasn't already happened!