quoted 18 lines On a computer, Greg Earle typed:> On a computer, Greg Earle typed:
>>>> I honestly don't have any idea how someone that is roughly 21
>>>> today would react to something like a (nearly) 17-year-old album
>>>> like "Unknown Pleasures"; given that today's listener doesn't have
>>>> the same context.
>
> To which Gonzalo Merchan responded:
>>> I listen to it every Sunday on viynl, and I'm 20, not 21. Sundays I
>>> pull out all the Joy Division/New Order records on viynl and pour
>>> over the LA Times Calendar section. Joy Division and New Order are
>>> (along with RDJ) the most important music in my life. Seeing New
>>> Order with 808 State at the Hollywood Bowl in 1993 was a life
>>> changing experience...
>
> I'd have to agree wholeheartedly. I consider JD/NO VERY key music
> in my life. But, more importantly, I'd disagree with Greg's assertion
> that today's listener of 21 years (or 20) can't understand what Ian
> was singing about.
Whoa!!! (The sound you hear is the sound of Greg removing Dale's words from
his mouth)
Since when does "I ... don't have any idea how someone [young] today would
react to something [now quite old]" equate to "today's [young] listener can't
understand what Ian was singing about"??? I said no such thing.
quoted 5 lines What JD's music was (mostly) about was the sadness and disappointments> What JD's music was (mostly) about was the sadness and disappointments
> in life. Some was undoubtedly personal -- and NOBODY will ever
> understand it fully; but, to say that the music they made stands any
> less powerful or meaningful today is false. What matters more is the
> personality of the listener, not the date on the calendar.
I don't quite agree. In the mid 70's I listened to a fair bit of The Doors,
old Who, The Velvets, old(er) Bowie, etc. I am saying that I don't think my
experience of that music could be quite the same as that of someone for whom it
existed in a present context. That's not to say I couldn't appreciate it as
being Good Music[tm], just that my context wasn't the same. What we listen
to here on IDM, I would say, is music that mostly has an uplifting emotional
context (if, indeed, it has that kind of element). "Happy ravers!" We're
not really talking Gloom n' Doom stuff here. That's why I said what I said;
I really don't know how someone that's young today, reading this mailing
list, would react to something that's very old and non-Techno and which has
no present-day context (i.e. I'm sure some of you young'uns on this list
listen to non-Techno musics; JD doesn't sound like current-day guitar-based
music). Heck, for all I know, the reaction could be "Awww, that's just more
of that old-hat Rock n' Roll stuff."
The interesting thing with IDM to me is that by being electronic and primarily
non-vocal, it has the potential to be less context-based. The thing about
context and present-day context comes across like this: if I hear something
like "James Brown Is Dead" in the here and now, it sounds like what it is -
cheesy old rave music. But it also reminds me of all the fun times I had
at earlier raves here in L.A., and it provided the jumping block for a lot
of people who hadn't had much exposure to raves or Techno music to get into
the scene, so it remains an extremely influential record (notice how I said
"influential", not "classic" or "great" or somesuch value judgement of the
record itself). With Techno music having evolved so rapidly - FAR more
rapidly than any music associated with any subculture I've been involved with
in the past 20+ years - it will be interesting to see what stuff lasts well
after its present-tense "Man, that takes me right back to Ibiza" or "Wow I
can almost taste that E I was on when I heard <this track> at <that rave>"
context has disappeared ... maybe I should ask some new 16 year old ravers
what they think of "Charly" or "Spice" or "Energy Flow" or ...
- Greg