very long piece on Replacements and Covers (was fulks and covers)

1999-03-02 Thread Jacob London



Well, I've held off burdening the whole list with this for a couple of
years now, although I have sent to a few folks I thought would enjoy it.
But since Dave Purcell brought it up, I'll post this behemoth against my
better judgment. I do think it's germane. And I also think that when Fulks
covers "Jet" he takes part in the tradition I talk about in the piece. At
some level, it's part of what puts the "alt" in his alt country
categorization (imho). Actually, I'd argue that it's a big part of what   
puts the "alt" in alt-country generally. But I won't belabor that here. I 
think it will make more sense if you read the thing.

As you'll see, I'd argue that at this point, it's impossible for Fulks'
actions not to be viewed as somewhat ironic by the audience. Nevertheless,
I view irony primarily as a shield in this context anyway (although it may
not be a shield Fulks himself needs anymore). A good pop song has the
power to touch us at the deepest emotional level, especially one from our
childhood before we knew all about hipness, etc. Unfortunately, many of us
from the post baby-boom generation forgot or have been too insecure to
admit this truth, especially in our late teens and twenties. So irony
helps create a space for us to safely be nostalgic about some rather
absurd times. 

Anyway, sorry in advance for the length. I also hope the formatting isn't
too screwed up. I'm afraid I write in pretty long paragraphs sometimes.   
This thing has never been published anywhere. Indeed, I'm not even sure   
why I wrote it. I guess I just think about this stuff too much sometimes.

That's why I love this list. It's one of the few places where I've found
some kindred spirits.  

Enjoy or delete.

JL   


Sucking in the Seventies: Paul Westerberg, the Replacements, 
and the Onset of the Ironic Cover Aesthetic in Rock and Roll 
(It's Only Rock and Roll But I Like It)

By Jacob London, Copyright 1996 All Rights Reserved

A while back, my local "alternative" radio station began playing a
cover version of the Bay City Rollers' "Saturday Night" by the U.K. band
Ned's Atomic Dustbin. The first time I heard it, I didn't even think about
changing the station, even though the Rollers were one of the most
critically unhip bands of the 1970s. I just sat back and listened,
slightly amused, but mostly taking the whole experience for granted. Such
is the state of things now that the practice of "alternative" bands
covering "bad" songs from the 1970s has become so commonplace. If it isn't
Ned's Atomic Dustbin, it's Seaweed or Smashing Pumpkins doing some
Fleetwood Mac song like "Go Your Own Way" or "Landslide." 

Few question the full-on embrace of 1970s popular culture anymore.
It's even got it's own "American Grafitti" film in Richard Linklater's
"Dazed and Confused." Linklater's take on the past is a little more
self-conscious and cynical than George Lucas's vision of the early 1960s
in "American Grafitti." But Linklater's remembrance of teen life in 1976
remains a warm one, especially in its unself-consciously reverant use of
the period's music. It pushes all the same buttons as Lucas's film,
although neither Linklater nor his audience would ever completely admit
it. For even as the residue of 1970s has reasserted itself in the American
cultural life of the 1990s, a lingering tinge of reticence remains, as
people continue to adjust to the idea that openly embracing the mainstream
culture of the 1970s no longer entails being instantly labeled a loser or
a philistine.

Back in the early 1980s, when I was starting college in Ann Arbor,
Michigan, things were a lot different. There was plenty of risk involved
in embracing the mainstream music of the 1970s, at least among the
community of rock and roll hipsters I hung out with. A friend later
summarized the stakes very well in a different context: "There's a lot on
the line when you tell other people what kind of music you like;  people
know they'll be judged based on what they say. If they give the right
answer they'll be accepted. If they don't, people may look down on them."

This was true in Ann Arbor during that time as it has been
everywhere I've lived since. The rules determining inside and outside were
generally unwritten, but they weren't hard to figure out. Punk rock was
cool. Some New Wave was cool. David Bowie, he was pretty cool (his glam
rock was sort of New Wave and Punk before they were invented). Dylan, the
Beatles, the Byrds, the Stones, the Who, Motown, and the other classics of
1960s rock, that was cool too, as long as you weren't too much of a hippie
about it.  But the mainstream music of the 1970s was not cool. Disco
sucked, including George Clinton and his P-Funk allies. Foreigner was not
cool.  Lynyrd Skynyrd was not cool.  Neither were Black Sabbath, Led
Zepplin, Peter Frampton, Foghat, Bad Company, Thin Lizzy, or Alice Cooper.
Black Oak Arkansas was not cool. Neither were Head East, R.E.O. 
Speedwagon, the Michael Stanley 

Re: very long piece

1999-03-02 Thread David Cantwell

Since I'm one of the lucky few who Jacob had shared this with, I can give
my estimation of the piece right now: one of best, smartest, most
insightful music pieces I've ever read. Period. --david cantwell 




sucking in the 70s (was Fulks/very long piece)

1999-03-02 Thread cwilson

 I'm off to a company-awards dinner with an open bar, so I can't linger 
 at the moment. But I'd like to urge everybody who might have balked at 
 the length to read Jake's piece right now (tho he shouldn't have sent 
 it as an attachment - you should repost it as mail for those who can't 
 handle attachments, Jake).
 
 It's the most engaging and cogent piece of personal rock crit/history 
 I've read in a long while - a lot like some of the considered essays 
 people used to post to P2 more often in the distant past. (When there 
 weren't seven-fucking-hundred of us.)
 
 I have some points to make about the demographic analysis he offers, 
 how that's shifted since the essay was written, and how that relates 
 to my argument that post-irony (not to be confused with boomer 
 non-irony) is happily finally here (in my previous post).
 
 I also have some thread-sparking questions (what was the first known 
 instance of the half-ironic cover - is he right in naming the 'Mats's  
 Kiss cover as Patient Zero - and also how to relate this web of 
 analysis to the various levels of irony in alt-country covers of both 
 rock and country so-called cheeze). 
 
 Briefly, the grunge-lounge period dynamic changed the landscape - 
 which I think relates very much to why the post-Tupelo alt-country 
 explosion (much to do with groping toward authenticity-sincerity) has 
 happened.
 
 As I say, I've got some serious drinking to do, so that'll have to 
 wait til morning. But y'all could start without me, I won't mind.
 
 Thanks a lot Jake. Don't wait 3 years next time!
 
 Carl W.



Re: sucking in the 70s (was Fulks/very long piece)

1999-03-02 Thread Ph. Barnard

Yes, Jake, can you please repost your piece in straight mail form for 
those of us whose computers don't open attachments?  

Many thanks,
--junior



Re: very long piece on Replacements and Covers (was fulks andcovers)

1999-03-02 Thread Barry Mazor

Jake--can I call ya Jake--

That's as good a dissection of the issue Dina's question raised as I've
seen anywhere.

And also  something of an excellent defense of something which probably
SHOULDN'T have needed to be defended--an audience's recation to what it
herad, the way it heard it.

Now, I'll wager (hope!) you won't feel generationally pressured or doubt my
word if I say that, tho born in 1950, right dab in the middle of those
years you corrcetly identify as core "boomer" -I think I was always enough
of an ironic type not to fall into the sorts of traps you note many of
about my age have.  (At least, I've done a reasonable job of resisting the
impulse.)
 I also happen to despise the word boomer--even moreso when used  all
smiley cuddley  beaming with daisies  by somebody who is of that post-war
generation themselves BTW --and just want to note that damn few people my
age have ever felt  or had reason to feel that we're arrived at power let
alone hegemony over much of anything.   As many of us as there are, and as
intimidating and annoying as the sheer fact of us must often seem, those
sheer numbers have largely reduced the power of most of us as
individuals--and even opportunities.

But enough of that morose stuff.  Part of the beauty of all this is that
none of us at all have to  abide by the  reductive, too dismissive,  and
often media-constructed notions of who we're supposed to be based ond when
(or where, BTW) we were born and raised.  In many ways--a lot of us around
here seem to avoid falling into sociological stereotypes--one of the charms
of P2--with members from--what did that report just say--18 to 65?

Thanks for some original thinking and unusually potent  writing.  This sort
of stuff is what made Postcard2 BTW, even if it's almost forgotten now.
Somehow iIt figures that Mr. Cantweell was one of those who got to see this
stuff early.  He's no opponent of "Really Long".  Fortunately.

Yet Sometimes I also just want to say  about our "generations"--"to hell
with all of 'em."There are real differences in experiences, of course--bu
tas  for these  capital G Generations  monumentalized in stone. sometimes,
for the individual, I think they mean about as much as decadesdo --not so
much in the larger scheme of things..

Ol' Barry M.
 Peeping out from behind the hegemonies.