Music evolving through the years

[Death_Mask]

Okay this is here just to continue a discussion me and LadyStardust were having on a different forum. But post any comments you might have on the subject.

[Apathy's_Child]

Could you elaborate on the subject for me? I missed the conversation that started this thread off. Is it about how your personal taste has evolved over the years or how you think music has changed over the years?

[Death_Mask]

About how a genre of music can evolve over years. We were talking about Emo, which I believe died in the 90’s but LadyStardust thought music might evolve and change.

I think bands that get branded as Emo like My Chemical Romance, Panic! At the disco, and fall out boy are just pop bands that have nothing to do with the genre. It’s like the whole Marilyn Manson and Goth thing.

[Wormboy]

Very true, very true indeed, though I'd consider Fall Out Boy to be somewhat annoying indie more than pop, but still

[LadyLucretia]

Originally Posted by Death_Mask

About how a genre of music can evolve over years. We were talking about Emo, which I believe died in the 90’s but LadyStardust thought music might evolve and change.

I think bands that get branded as Emo like My Chemical Romance, Panic! At the disco, and fall out boy are just pop bands that have nothing to do with the genre. It’s like the whole Marilyn Manson and Goth thing.

Well, once a music style is something the major labels are selling wholesale, I don't think it has much to do with the original style of music. Remember the pop punk explosion a few years back, with bands like Blink 182, Good Charlotte, Avril Lavigne, etc? That clearly had nothing to do with the actual punk scene. It's probably the same for these new faux-emo bands. I used to listen to an emo show on college radio years before it got big, and those bands sounded little to nothing like MCR, Panic at the Disco, and Fall out Boy. Emo has never been my thing, but I recognize the difference between real emo and the pop version of it.

[Apathy's_Child]

Avril Lavigne is considered pop punk? Egads, it's worse than I thought. At least Green Day have some decent songs if you don't hate pop as a matter of course.

[electrosexual]

In regards to goth music, I see it as becoming more and more electronic, sometimes even merging with industrial.

[LadyStardust]

*pant pant* I made it! Just . . give . . me . . . a . . minute . . . to . . . catch . . . my . . . breath . . .

So, what was REAL emo, then? Until recently, mainstream was all I was ever exposed to, so I'm more than a little behind on things. What makes a certain song/band fall into the Emo category?

[Vyvian Blackthorne]

Originally Posted by electrosexual

In regards to goth music, I see it as becoming more and more electronic, sometimes even merging with industrial.

Good goth...I must honestly say I agree, Electro. The flamboyancy of our culture and goth rock is edging toward the aggrotech, electronica or so-called "darkwave" sound.

Other than that, the majority of goth bands today are either re-forming (the new work not quite matching up toward the original) or involved in the deathrock revival.

The Industrial/synthpop sound is kind of messed around with our scene a bit. Soft Cell may be responsible, mainly Almonds' apperence and fame given throughout the 80s.

Hmhh..Originally, "emo" grew out of hardcore punk in the late 80s/early 90s. The themes were completely bastardizes and killed by what the media put attention toward. Now, sorry to cut this short but I am off to go burn some American flags.
Goth Forever
Goth Forever
Goth Forever

[Bete Noire]

Originally Posted by electrosexual

In regards to goth music, I see it as becoming more and more electronic, sometimes even merging with industrial.

Hmm I sort of agree, but I don't think all the electronic type stuff people call goth really has that much to do with the culture (just my opinion, I realise that huge part of the scene revolves almost exclusively around these bands.) That said, I do listen to darkwave/synthy stuff, it's just not my preference as far as gothy stuff goes.

[LadyStardust]

But WHAT WAS emo? What did it sound like? What were the themes? What qualified? What didn't?

[Death_Mask]

Originally Posted by LadyStardust

*pant pant* I made it! Just . . give . . me . . . a . . minute . . . to . . . catch . . . my . . . breath . . .

So, what was REAL emo, then? Until recently, mainstream was all I was ever exposed to, so I'm more than a little behind on things. What makes a certain song/band fall into the Emo category?

I still won though.

The original bands that were emo branched out from punk, and I believe the genre started of in the mid-80’s in Washington. The bands I used to listen to that were actual emo were Fugazi, Fire Party, Moss Icon and Rites of Spring. Of course there are loads more but these used to be my favourite.

They were punk bands but because of their over the top performances were named Emo as a joke by punks, I think. By over the top I mean breaking down in tears and falling to their knees on stage.

[thedoll]

So why have bands, such as blink-182, kept the label punk?

[LadyStardust]

I don't think there IS such a thing as punk anymore. Punk is not just about trying to rebel and being angry at everything, though that was a huge part of it. I think that punk ceased to be true punk as soon as it became popular in the mainstream. As soon as it was acceptable to wear torn jeans, or a mohawk - or the day someone SOLD something with the anarchy symbol on it - punk died. Punk, by its very nature, could not be popular, or even accepted. It was about doing what you were not allowed or supposed to do. It's kind of hard to wear torn clothes held together by safety pins as a statement against capitalism when Wal-Mart is SELLING stuff just like it.

[IsolatedReptile]

I think Blink 182 was punk to a degree. Musically at least. They're fans were not punks however. They were mostly wannabe punks.

I always found the perfect band to describe emo is Juliana Theory. Emotional but very tolerable.

As for goth music it is becoming intertwined with electronica but I have a feeling that won't last that long. I give it five to ten years at most.

[delicti]

Death_Mask is right on with Emo.

In regards to punk, I'll have to say that I personally think that the rebelliousness aspect has been overemphasized by the music press and industry. Punk has had its tradition of social rebellion, but the rebellion was more self-aware than the "rebellion for rebellion's sake" that is the current billing. I'll pull out an old magazine here in Punk's defense -

With the advent of punk in the mid Seventies, a movement existed in rock that declared itself to be specifically against the mass media and their cosy relationship with rock, establishing instead its own network of communicationin a plethora of fanzines and independent labels.
- Gary Herman, The History of Rock, 1983

The cheapening of punk into mindless rebellion has been the selling point of "pop punk," new "emo," and even "alternative." Take a hard listen to some of your favorite albums - is it a mindless bouncing from "rebellion" to sappy love songs? If so, you're listening to the exact pop swill that punk, and later post-punk was so adamantly against.

Outside of that, I'm totally with LadyStardust on punk. Crass said "punk is dead" in '78, specifically speaking about how punk was suddenly being bought and sold, instead of being innovated. Local punk shows rarely have the same vitality and sense of urgency that punk had back in its day. "Punk" as it is billed on the radio is nothing more than the music industry continuing to stagnate by further cannibalizing the last revolution they actually recognized before killing.

[IsolatedReptile]

So just say the attitude is dead. Why waste anyone's time with all that trite. Musically, it is alive. The attitude is dead. As far as emo goes, it was an offshoot, pop punk is a type of punk, and alternative is a spin off from punk.

[Death_Mask]

Punks dead, grunge is dead and so is emo.

It’s like all those bands like good charlotte trying to come of as punk and grunge bands nowadays are just trying to be Pink Floyd. Actually I think there are a few books written on the whole emo being dead subject.

I don’t really know how all these pop bands were labelled emo, but it stands for emotive hardcore or emotive rock NOT pop with a converse thrown in.

[LadyStardust]

Originally Posted by IsolatedReptile

So just say the attitude is dead. Why waste anyone's time with all that trite. Musically, it is alive. The attitude is dead. As far as emo goes, it was an offshoot, pop punk is a type of punk, and alternative is a spin off from punk.

I have to disagree with you there. The attitude is a large part of the genre. Punk was a culture, not just a certain sound. The culture is gone, and therefore, new music that may sound like old punk will never truly be punk. To say that only the attitude of punk is dead, not all of punk, is like saying Elvis isn't really dead, he's just physiologically deceased.

[LadyLucretia]

Originally Posted by IsolatedReptile

alternative is a spin off from punk.

What makes you say that? Alternative as it was in the late 80's/early 90's was just a catch-all term for music that didn't fit in easily with other labels like "rock" or "metal." There were many archetypal "alternative" bands that clearly had nothing to do with punk, such as Dead Can Dance, XTC, The Violent Femmes, Indigo Girls, Cocteau Twins, They Might Be Giants, and many more. I would argue that alternative as we know it today has even less to do with punk, and more to do with grunge, rock, and metal.

[delicti]

Originally Posted by IsolatedReptile

So just say the attitude is dead. Why waste anyone's time with all that trite. Musically, it is alive. The attitude is dead.

Because knowledge of the genre is incredibly important if you're going to talk about it. In punk's heyday, there were all sorts of zines that were being read by punks, and they had no problems with it. And all of those zines were longer than my post.

The attitude of punk was perhaps more important than the music itself. Because punk wanted to be something different, making punk that sounds like punk at this point in time is about as anti-punk as it gets.

[KontanKarite]

I'll kick a trash can and that's punk. You kick a trash can and that's trendy. Be your damn self and don't compromise who you are for anything.

*shrugs* I'm good a bastardizing things.

[IsolatedReptile]

I completely understand that the attitude is dead, but it's a bit like classical. If someone writes a classical piece today, it's classical, but it's not classical like it was three hundred years ago. Someone writes a punk ditty today, it's punk, but not like it was back in seventy seven.

I say that alternative evolved from punk, not mean all alternative, but much of it that came from post-punk and other styles that shared punks attitude such as early industrial and new wave. Other styles came from these styles and post punk bands, eventually creating the catch all alternative. Now, grunge evolved from post punk and punk as well from bands like Killing Joke and Pixies, so, arguably, grunge is a cousin of punk (from the attitude to the musical style).

Alternative also was a phrase started during the late seventies to describe punk. It was an alternative to pop, rock, and r&b.

I also have no problem reading long posts and plenty to do with music. I read more than a couple music magazine, from Spin to some local 'zines.

To be honest, I'm not entirely sure why I said that it was trite. Perhaps it felt like arguments I'd argued before and it felt repetitive. I apologize.

[delicti]

Originally Posted by IsolatedReptile

I completely understand that the attitude is dead, but it's a bit like classical. If someone writes a classical piece today, it's classical, but it's not classical like it was three hundred years ago. Someone writes a punk ditty today, it's punk, but not like it was back in seventy seven.

Well, with bands like Throbbing Gristle, Joy Division, The Sex Pistols, The Cure, and Siouxsie and the Banshees, The Cramps, The Clash, etc, all claiming some rights to the Punk name, I think there's good reason to be skeptical when we see punk presented as an over-simplified package that pales in comparison to its' original form.

I think that the unifying factor in punk was the need to create something new that represented the people who were listening to it. Both Joey Ramone and Johnny Thunders were pretty vocal about how new punk totally missed the point for a very long time(to the point where the Ramones started denying they were punk), so I think it's important to make the distinction.

The reason punk is not comparable to classical is because the methods of creation were not meant to be under a specific formula, as the music industry would have you believe. Classical now is classical because it was meant to created a certain way. Punk was not; so creating music specifically because it sounds like the punk that is most commonly accepted as punk, is basically not punk.

The CA Hardcore scene and UK Oi scenes were more about the mentality of making punk that sounded the way most people think of punk these days. The UK and NYC punk eventually did as well, but that can be largely blamed on Malcolm MacLaren, and to some extent the socio-anarchist movement to whom the music was of little importance.

Either way, punk these days has nothing to do with punk. It's either pop, or shitty pop, depending on how many people you're trying to attract.

[IsolatedReptile]

I can certainly see where you're coming from. I agree to a degree, however, I still feel as though the music can be formulated and created. You write a fast paced three chord song and it's "punk." That does not make you a punk. It just seems to me that the musical definition can live on, not as strongly as when it was started, but it can live.