Reynolds hardcore continuum event

[mos dan]

thanks badga tek for backing me up on the technological shifts.. it is easy to be suspicious of 'internet has changed everything' sweeping statements, but as you say, duplate and pirate radio culture will never be the same again.

Its unthinkable that its somehow unwelcome to theorise and speculate or abstract about music cos it's somehow not 'real' enough which is what this statement from alex suschon suggests. Infact why doesn't he interview the people he talks about here about their histories rather than suggesting that he speaks for them, or is embarrased to talk to them about it, part of me wonders if this isn't generation resentment and the hcc continuum just is too old?

i have to stick up for alex here too, i quoted him without asking at the start of my article, it was taken from a quick blog post he wrote a year ago, and he shouldn't have to keep sticking up for his throwaway comment - particularly when there might be truth it. after all, especially in regards to what you say about 'why doesn't he interview oddz and eastwood if that's what he thinks' - here's the bottom line:

we DO interview people, and in the pursuit of our passion, we talk to promoters, djs, mcs, producers all the time. we're in raves three times a week, we're on forums, alex runs raves, does radio, and booked lil silva for his first london show, we're all sending new mp3s back and forth all the time.

and i really think that's important, and that some of reynolds' more vocal defenders ought to think about the implications for the nuum that he is forming his opinions from behind his desk, from across a vast ocean. and that, in 2008, he didn't know what 'showerman' meant. he's an incredible writer, and i really like mark too, but i don't know why people are surprised at a slight tetchiness emanating from 'this generation'. we are the ones who are actually engaging with this music, and its makers, beyond the abtract, and we're being told off for 'getting it wrong' by people who haven't seen the inside of a club in years.

ps - donk's 'rude energy', anyone? (no facetious-o)

 

[padraig (u.s.)]

Also, my memory's a bit hazy as to where I read this (probably on his blog at some point years ago) but I seem to remember SR once proclaiming grime to be the culmination and effective endpoint of the HCC for a number of reasons which I can't really recall now.

I think I remember that was as well - didn't he name, inexplicably, Bruza - "Doin Me" as the literal endpoint? or maybe I'm confusing that with a Woebot post.

 

[mms]

thanks badga tek for backing me up on the technological shifts.. it is easy to be suspicious of 'internet has changed everything' sweeping statements, but as you say, duplate and pirate radio culture will never be the same again.



i have to stick up for alex here too, i quoted him without asking at the start of my article, it was taken from a quick blog post he wrote a year ago, and he shouldn't have to keep sticking up for his throwaway comment - particularly when there might be truth it. after all, especially in regards to what you say about 'why doesn't he interview oddz and eastwood if that's what he thinks' - here's the bottom line:

we DO interview people, and in the pursuit of our passion, we talk to promoters, djs, mcs, producers all the time. we're in raves three times a week, we're on forums, alex runs raves, does radio, and booked lil silva for his first london show, we're all sending new mp3s back and forth all the time.

and i really think that's important, and that some of reynolds' more vocal defenders ought to think about the implications for the nuum that he is forming his opinions from behind his desk, from across a vast ocean. and that, in 2008, he didn't know what 'showerman' meant. he's an incredible writer, and i really like mark too, but i don't know why people are surprised at a slight tetchiness emanating from 'this generation'. we are the ones who are actually engaging with this music, and its makers, beyond the abtract, and we're being told off for 'getting it wrong' by people who haven't seen the inside of a club in years.

ps - donk's 'rude energy', anyone? (no facetious-o)

yes it's polemic, not an arguement regarding whether you guys are active or nice or not , cos i know you all are, you know i am too, its more or less that that's an argument that needs to be contested too, also its not a very imaginative, argument, it's similar to one that you hear on places like dubstep forum or wherever, where people are just ' it's all greek to me, who cares' etc , which is fine but then don't engage in it which is also what you guys are doing too, you have alot of good points but this was the worst point and the headline of the piece.

It's fine to dismiss a theory but contesting the theory and moving along with the theory is the point where things will really hot up, you've just highlighted your disproval at the moment, to an extent. You can sort of see where pro theorists like k punk and reynolds might feel smug, as they could argue that there is nothing exciting enough to critically theorise, (as they tap from their computers) which is ours/yours to counter i think.

 

[whatever]

t's fine to dismiss a theory but contesting the theory and moving along with the theory is the point where things will really hot up, you've just highlighted your disproval at the moment, to an extent. You can sort of see where pro theorists like k punk and reynolds might feel smug, as they could argue that there is nothing exciting enough to critically theorise, which is ours/yours to counter i think.

all of htis makes sense but one premiss in this discusion i don't hear very often questioned is this: what the fuck is so theoretical about SR's hcc account anyway? It's a description of a tradition, of a moment (bunch of years), genres emerging from genres, accounts of groups of people producing/listening/dancing/mixing/raving together ... but where is the theory? as far as i can see, SR has very, veyr little 'theorizing' , and kpunk too for that matter, neither are a patch on their colleagues in other parallel universe, say, literary or film theory or art theory/history/crticism ... SR has had very little to say that was more than descriptive it seems to me . someone correct me plz.

 

[mos dan]

It's fine to dismiss a theory but contesting the theory and moving along with the theory is the point where things will really hot up, you've just highlighted your disproval at the moment, to an extent.

when and if a new theory presents itself, i will be ready to write about it

and yeah of course we're all nice, kode is right about that lol http://kode9.blogspot.com/2009/02/crossfire-continues.html

 

[whatever]

btw i meant to sayy that i accept the majority of what SR says about the hcc, it's interesting and descriptively sound in the fundamentals seemingly, no? ... the sketchy part is how he continues to try to use it 1] to make aesthetic valuations of tunes and genres more recent 2]makes claims about continuities taht are descriptively deficient b/c he doesn't knwo the local context and 3] prescriptiv or predictive accounts about the end of the continnuum or what people should or shldnt do . for starters. but as a good early-years account its rlly good, no? ( not especially 'theoretical' as i wrote a minute ago but descriptively prtty good history account i had thought )

 

[mms]

btw i meant to sayy that i accept the majority of what SR says about the hcc, it's interesting and descriptively sound in the fundamentals seemingly, no? ... the sketchy part is how he continues to try to use it 1] to make aesthetic valuations of tunes and genres more recent 2]makes claims about continuities taht are descriptively deficient b/c he doesn't knwo the local context and 3] prescriptiv or predictive accounts about the end of the continnuum or what people should or shldnt do . for starters. but as a good early-years account its rlly good, no? ( not especially 'theoretical' as i wrote a minute ago but descriptively prtty good history account i had thought )

yeah this is about right, i think this big argument has just been thrown up by the blogs, it's basically an argument between ppl who are only one or two steps removed from knowing each other or do know each other, so it's almost squabbling, the next move is to move beyond the criticisim of the theory, which i think in this instance means creating a kind of metanarrative, based on an ideology around a bunch of records and clubs, and personalities and their histories, although there is some actual continental theory, and marxist theory in the book.

 

[gumdrops]

I think I remember that was as well - didn't he name, inexplicably, Bruza - "Doin Me" as the literal endpoint? or maybe I'm confusing that with a Woebot post.

i think woebot gave grime a bit longer and was still more optimistic but then i think the last thing about grime he posted was hearing skepta on radio one and thinking it was shit. that was a few years ago now though. kpunk meanwhile, if that fact piece is anything to go by, still seems to think bassline (!) is leading the way as far as current underground sub-genres.

 

[slackk]

To be fair to him, bassline is by far the biggest attended sound in the country. Just because London isn't on it, it doesn't mean everywhere else isn't.

 

[stelfox]

I'm not involved in this sort of work any more and won't be writing anything more about music ever again, but if you can't trace (and, most importantly, hear) a clear relationship between Shut Up & Dance, Remarc, Steve Gurley's work as Foul Play and Dem 2, El-B and Horsepower, Bugz In The Attic, John E Cash and Digital Mystiks, Dexplicit, Jamie Duggan, Geeneus and Perempay, then there's something a bit off. The idea of the "hardcore continuum" is not and wasn't ever a straight line. It breaks off and spiders often.
Really, rather than anything else I've always argued (often way too literally argued, sometimes just stated) that the "continuum" is just a splinter part of a much older genealogy of Jamaican soundsystem culture the UK. All the hardcore continuum did was take this and apply it to house and techno from the US. If funky doesn't tie in with that, I don't know what does. Actually when I thinks about funky, I see it as a kind contemporary return to ground zero, almost the way that breakbeat hardcore (itself a reaction to US house) could have gone if London's demographic was different (the Africanisation of London street music that I've mentioned before) and more jazzy guys were involved (a hell a lot of funky sounds like a lot of the West London music that I actually liked back in its day: Seiji's stuff and the more percussive, less fussy end of it all). It also makes me happy as a reclamation of house music by a predominantly black, urban audience, as opposed to a white suburban one. I disagree with K-Punk about past shock and a sense of regression in funky. It's absolutely of its time; not as much of a formal or semiotic leap, granted, but certainly very now and is very much a result of all the things the went before. Also, I don't think, either Mark or Simon really like dancing, which is is by far the biggest problem when it comes to appreciating funky. It's great, functional dance music as house always has been and you have to engage with it in a physical way in order for it to really make sense.
Still, guys, to say that a theory which simply articulates the blindingly, headbangingly obvious (as all the best ones do) isn't relevant because time has passed is a bit excessive. The good thing about the continuum theory is that it's a continuum, meaning that it moves on and can absorb many, many more things. Also to say that living outside of a culture for a while means that you have no right to comment on it is berserk. This would make almost all my writing completely and totally invalid, for instance. I was not living in Jamaica at any point, ever. Also by those rules I should not even be expressing an opinion like this. I live in a cultureless shithole at the moment, millions of miles away from anything germane to this conversation or my former life, after all. While I don't really think my work was worth a ton to anyone, not even me, it wasn't completely and utterly senseless and I was definitely "allowed" to write it, as any critic is, about anything they want. Contextal understanding is good, no doubt, new ideas and developments are great and welcomed by anyone but a fool, but these things are not the be all and end all. Also showing us elderly folks a bit of respect is just a nice thing to do. You'll all be senile and past it one day, too, don't forget. Over and out for another six months or so.

 

[boomnoise]

I'm not involved in this sort of work any more and won't be writing anything more about music ever again, .

sorry to hear this dave

 

[baboon2004]

http://www.factmagazine.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1923&Itemid=105 - k-punk defends the 'nuum

Don't understand particularly what's at stake with this argument, as surely the HC is just a theory to attempt to make sense of a lineage of British dance musics, which, as with any other encompassing theory, conveniently ignores some things which don't fit in neatly with it. Which is fine - it has enough merit as a broad theory to excuse the occasional intentional oversight.

But, having said that, a handful of the arguments in the article quoted are bullshit (unless my skim reading has led me to misunderstand, which is entirely possible), especially as regards 'future shock'. Jungle was indeed radical, and possibly incomprehensible to an audience from '88 - possibly. But to say that wonky conatins less future shock than bassline (have I even read this right??) is absurd. Play most bassline to a '96 audience and they'd be perfectly familiar with it. While wonky has undoubtedly taken inspiration from Dilla etc (and any hardcore continuum will always have taken numerous elements from outside itself), much of the stuff produced 'under' this label is undoubtedly new and fresh, and a genuine future shock.

Maybe not to the same extent as jungle, but, then, in '94 very few people had access to the whole universe of recorded sound, as many now do thanks to filesharing etc. Therefore the first encounter with jungle was inevitably more headspinning than anything post -2000 or so.

 

[Alfons]

don't know in which thread this link belongs, but Im putting it here:
http://www.vbs.tv/video.php?id=12185178001

In part one of our Donk-umentary, VBS visits the Harmony youth project in Bolton. Harmony is a teen community center turned recording studio and is more or less the mecca of donk culture. Donk's very own boy band Blackout Crew was born here and still uses it to craft their tunes. The center also plays host to semi-nightly rap battles between local teens that, as you'll see toward the end of episode, get as crowded and hectic as anything going on in sub-suburban Detroit.

 

[Badga Tek]

On a lighter note, I think Jace Clayton has hit the nail on the head.

"If you haven’t heard the term (HCC), cease reading now & save yourself some mental space."

If only I had this option :slanted:

 

[mos dan]

On a lighter note, I think Jace Clayton has hit the nail on the head.

"If you haven’t heard the term (HCC), cease reading now & save yourself some mental space."

If only I had this option :slanted:

lol when did jace write on this? nothing on mudd up. apart from that david byrne pic.

 

[Badga Tek]

lol when did jace write on this? nothing on mudd up. apart from that david byrne pic.

http://www.negrophonic.com/2008/the-ice-cream-cone-continuum/

(Link was on Kode's blog)

 

[vimothy]

detached, and sometimes smarmy and/or condescending, but never a false pretense of cool.

Weird. Although I don't think that there is anything wrong with pretending to be cool (probably the right attitude if you listen to music that is often made by kids in order to sound cool), I always felt that Bangs was a total geek -- the opposite of cool. Plus, he could write, which is not something that you can accuse too many music journalists of (present company excepted, of course).

 

[padraig (u.s.)]

Weird. Although I don't think that there is anything wrong with pretending to be cool (probably the right attitude if you listen to music that is often made by kids in order to sound cool), I always felt that Bangs was a total geek -- the opposite of cool. Plus, he could write, which is not something that you can accuse too many music journalists of (present company excepted, of course).

if by "he could write" you mean turn out the occasional brilliant sentence then sure. otherwise, no. tbf he's got tons of style but it's all mostly a mess & he never actually says anything. which I mean sometimes style is entertaining I guess. I don't really care if writers want to pretend they're cool what bothers me is when it supercedes what they're writing about. again why I prefer a writer like SR cause it's always about the actual music (plus all the music's attendant cultural trappings) never about his personality as a writer. also I didn't mean chic cool like Lou Reed or something I meant rock geek cool. like yeah he was a schlub but that was part of his identify, the ultimate rock fan. anyway it's just a matter of preference of course.

 

[vimothy]

"De gustibus non disputandum" as the Romans used to say. I can't imagine reading Simon for the writing in and of itself. Ultimately, it's about the music he's covering. He's a journalist/music critic. It's functional. With Bangs the situation is reversed. I guess we're kind of in agreement there.

 

[wascal]

I'd hazard a guess that most producers on the bleeding edge of Funky, Wonky (and whatever new sound is being crafted in some teenage bedsit) couldn't care less about the nuum and just make music to move the dancefloor on the weekend.