Before this gets out of hand, let me say this: Personally, I have no
qualms about Dubstep. My response was not to be misconstrued as a
"bash dubstep" post. HOWEVER, the part that really bothered me (and
YES, I'm sensitive about it) is when someone classified it as "The New
Detroit."
Eclecticism and perpetual reinvention? Absolutely. In fact, that's
one of the reasons why I like dubstep. But here's something I'd like
for you to acknowledge. People remember HEADLINES. Writers are
basically taught to engage their readers with a powerful HEADLINE.
And as a Detroit artist, that particular headline spoke volumes to
ME. It said, in so many words, "Detroit is dead. Out with the old,
in with the new..." And I guarantee you I'm not the ONLY Detroit
artist who read it that way.
Mind you, I could've simply dismissed the headline. But that's only
worsening the problem. I have no problem with evolution -- in fact,
it's how I SURVIVE. But SOMEBODY needed to step up and say to those
who might see exactly what I saw in that headline, "WE ARE STILL HERE."
Detroit already has a bad reputation, to begin with. From the "joke
of a mayor" we used to have, to having the "dumbest kids in the
nation," the LAST thing we need is somebody saying to a new generation
of music listeners that Croydon -- or anywhere else -- is the "New
Detroit."
A better headline could've compared Croydon's evolution to Detroit.
But unlike what a lot of popular articles suggest, Detroit is NOT an
adjective. Detroit is HOME. And when someone or something threatens
YOUR home, it's only natural that you defend it...
Aaron-Carl
All fair points, and it must get irritating watching people trade on
Detroit's reputation without ever having lived there. As you say, it's
the headline that's irritating and I guess I'm just numb to that these
days, especially in music journalism, but I totally can see why you'd
want to speak up about it.
Cheers,
Tristan
