John Drefahl wrote:
> Argh, pinned as a fashion whore yuppie before I could even say a >word..
Didn't say you were, and I wouldn't be quite so familiar with the
contents of Wallpaper and GQ, or Autumn/Winter menswear trends if I
didn't read them too. It's just the question of whether you think
anything can ever translate from those pages into a real youth style,
rather than high-end fashion for well-paid 25-35 year olds.
> As I said.. the substance of this new mod culture I am sure is
> lacking.. but I still can't understand this behavior to expect new
> mods to listen to old mod music.
Did I mention old music?
Though to repeat - because otherwise you're something else - why bother
being a 'mod' rather than a 'raver', Britpop kid, or Latin-House fan,
unless you think the mods had something these things lack. And that's
Jimmy Smith records. And a subculture without substance is just fashion.
> While mod's roots are in blues,
> soul, and jazz one should pigeon hole a social movement to those two
> things.
Our two main weapons are blues, soul and jazz. Our three main weapons
are blues, soul and jazz and a ruthless dedication to Paul Weller. Among
our main weapons are . . . .
> Music evolves, cultures evolve, mod will evolve with it. I
> just can't take this 'please fill out your, 'are you a mod survey'
> and return it to the head face for approval.."
There's a little conjuring trick that some journalists have that I can't
stand too. It's when they express some point of view, and then justify
it not with an argument, but by the fact there's a large number of
people who disagree with them.
My apologies, but the Modish Inquisition does not actually exist. I've
never had someone come round my flat and question the non-60s/non-mod
records in my collection. I've never had anyone stop me going to a
non-scene gig or club - in fact I've occasionally met mods at them too.
And when mod does evolve, it often evolves into other things (the 70s
rock scene, the acid jazz scene) - leaving the mod thing, well, mod. And
people like yourself complaining about it just being itself. Eddie
Pillar is alive and well and still DJing.
> More or less I think
> its fair to say that people today can adopt the mod look, feel, and
> way of living and thinking and apply it to today's society and daily
> life trials.
John, not sure how aware you are in the US of our PM, Tony Blair, but he
makes a lot of speeches using words like 'Modern' and 'New' and implying
his enemies are stuck in the past and against change, while never really
getting down to the nitty-gritty of specifics as to what he means by
modern (mostly the same as new, which is mostly the same as the status
quo). There's a similar content to your posts - we know what you're
against (all us people stuck in the past with our Quannum albums and
tickets for Broadcast), but we don't know what you stand FOR - except a
passionate commitment to newness and modernity.
> Otherwise, you might as just say mod was as corny as
> the Swing movement revival. I see it now.. "Dirty Dancing" Starring
> PHIL DANIELS!
On occasions it can be, but then it's not as if modern culture isn't
above cheese - cheesy rave, cheesy rap, cheesy Britpop - they all exist.
I can't speak about the Swing revival (though I'm sure there must be
some outraged originators somewhere) as despite a few attempts here and
there it never caught on in the UK, but I guess the comparison over here
would be '70s nites' - and what makes these events cheesy isn't the
music, but the punters attitudes. I guess the B52s and Austin Powers
represent the 'corn' end of 60s revivalism. The mod scene doesn't - it's
not kitsch, because it's punters aren't. Mostly they are living, not
re-living. The 'I wish it was really 1964' brigade are actually the
minority - even if most people look 60s (because that's the fashion, but
isn't it THE fashion this year too?).
> one thing? Yes this is America, I know.. but people still are pretty
> private about their lives and don't wear there stances and views on
> their shoulders. Why, because its a distraction from everyday life.
> Hense the reason why I don't wear a suit to work every day or dress
> mod every day is because I would distract my co-workers..
Not to set myself up as the ace face or anything as someone from the
list is bound to catch me one morning hungover and in blue jeans and a
T-shirt but . . . I find it pretty impossible to go into work not
dressed 'mod' to some degree or other, because that's whats in my
wardrobe. And even when I do turn up wearing Jigsaw and Paul Smith,
people still (when they were still bothered, they quickly get used to
it) make comments / compliments about retro style. What's the point in
making concessions to everyday life?
> but for the most parts the suits are
> becoming slimmer, tighter
I know that feeling.
But more seriously - yes, it's the current declared trend by the fashion
industry, so enjoy it while it lasts. And don't worry when it goes,
because at the current speed of recycling it should be back in for 2003.
> Once that
> curiosity is caught.. they then will explore all the beautiful music
> and culture that mod has been and always will be about.
So what's so different about it this time, as opposed to 1997?
ex-Brighton Beach punter/Britpop era mod, now wearing baggy skate gear
talking to Mark Ellis:
'Are you still into all that retro shit?'
Mark: 'Why, what are you into these days?'
Punter: 'Old-skool hip-hop'.
_________________________________________________________
Enlighten your in-box. http://www.topica.com/t/15
