Bland on Blonde: why the old rock music canon is finished

Superb post. Thanks for sharing.

 

Whoa! John Baker White! Ya missed the mark by a bit on that one!

 

Exactly. It's nice if your likes are shared, but if mine aren't shared by anyone, I'll still like what I like.

 

I dunno. That article wasn’t much. No real important arguments made at all.

Great music is great music. If something released today is better than Blonde on Blonde, then that’s great, canonize it! The fact that no great statements have been made in the past while, to displace most of the acknowledged great recordings, is somewhat telling.

 

This.

Not saying they aren't out there (and we go through this roundabout at least once a week around here), but the reason the great statements are great statements is by dint of mass acclaim from fans and critics alike. With genres and styles so completely slotted and pigeon-holed I'm not sure that's even possible any more. Nor has it been for quite a long while.

 

Perfectly said, as usual...

 

I guess my thought was that the author seems to refer to the “canon” without actually addressing what he deems worthy of placement on said “list”.

In the end, it’s just that.

Too many seem to get caught up in such lists,
either Top 10, Top 25, Top 40, Top 100, whatever. It’s completely subjective and arbitrary.

Ultimately, those that invest extreme importance in such lists, whether they agree, are ambivalent, or disagree, impart and lend further validity, power, and cultural significance to other music listeners’ opinions (aka Music Critics).

 

Excellent article echoed by the discussions in this forum. Lots of good points. I really like the point on the Sinatra and before him music not in the club. So much music all over the world now and a hundred years ago that is worthy. This is the best thing about You Tube. It takes away the, now, to meaning anytime. So Hoagy Charmichel and Bessie Smith are just as important and listened to as Dylan. Just not here.

 

This strikes me as the key point: We no longer have a unified cultural consensus to determine an easily agreed upon canon. I could toss out some names of albums that I really love but that lots of people either aren't aware of or don't care for. Some might point to something like To Pimp A Butterfly, but others would groan and dismiss it immediately. It's the same thing with TV. We have more choices than ever and great work is still being made but there's less consensus.

 

Another interesting thing to me is that young people dig the old rock cannon and know it. But, at the same time it's though eyes and ears of today. So they listen to current music as well. Love that. Not really the rebel thing of your music sux mine is better. More of i like what i like no matter when it was made.

 

No, the sad thing is they are trying and aren't as good. I would greatly enjoy hearing new music that is as resonant and passionate. I just don't hear it. There's always hope.

One factor about the remarkable music of the early 70's - with the advent of 8 and 16 track recording, bands could be recorded with more nuance and clarity. And before things got too clever and fussy and coke fueled, the focus was on the songs, and simply recording. "Who's Next" wouldn't have sounded as good recorded in 1967, and probably not in 1987

 

I am really enjoying the discussion in this thread. It has been great, with many insightful and enlightening posts.

As another fellow white middle aged heterosexual man, this is exactly on point! There's a whole big ole' goofy world out there. And, it's full of lots of fun, exciting, amazing people and ideas. I am always excited to learn everything I can about other cultures and am always amazed at those who aren't. I've never understood the siege mentality of, "if you're not exactly like me in both looks and thoughts, you're unworthy of me." In my household we never miss any of Josh Gates' shows, primarily because of the excitement and enthusiasm with which he always throws himself into the culture of whatever area of the world he is visiting. I just wish everybody else had that attitude (and wish his shows would spend more time on him exploring the culture and less on him looking for weird things... although him finding that woolly mammoth tusk was AMAZING!!!!).

There have been plenty of people who tried to do this in the past. Unfortunately, whenever someone attempts this, they're usually vilified and crucified for it.

And, yes, I chose those two words carefully.

 

To flip that around... I don't pretend to know the percentage of rock that is hardcore thrash-metal, but to pretend that it is not significant is disingenuous.

 

For some reason this topic reminded me of another wonderful piece of modern "journalism" -
After 100 years, the Cleveland Orchestra Continues to Ignore Women, Minorities and Living Composers

According to author -what a shame that classical orchestra plays almost only dead white guys of male gender (Bach, Beethoven, Schubert, Rachmaninoff, etc).

 

Some good points, and I definitely feel that female artists are significantly overlooked on best-of lists (but not just lists made by old guys; also on lists made by young guys and [shocker!] on lists made by men AND women.)

However, I'll play devil's advocate for a minute. Having a certain number of female artists in a record collection or on a list doesn't necessarily serve as the be all and end all indicator of how the record collector or list maker views music by women. For example, my Dad had an extensive vinyl and later CD collection.
I doubt that at any point in his life has he had more than ten percent of that by female artists. Basically Jefferson Airplane, Fleetwood Mac and a couple of Stevie Nicks solo, most of Joni Mitchell, Aretha's hits, Patsy Cline's hits, Pretenders self-titled, Tracy Chapman self-titled, and later on I got him into Garbage and Sheryl Crow. He currently is loving Waxahatchee. So literally that's the women in his collection. Is he missing out on some amazing stuff? Sure. But as for those few albums I listed, he loves and values them and would vehemently argue for their placement in any canon. He swore up and down that Joni Mitchell should have been in the top ten of Rolling Stone's 500.

I'm digressing, and I know that I'm not making any enlightening point. I happen to agree with several points in the article. But sometimes I think we get caught up in "how many records by men or women or bands or duos." My Dad might not have "enough" female artists in his personal collection, but he loves the hell out of the ones he does. When Aretha died, we were listening to her 30 greatest hits, and he said "next to the Beatles she's basically the best thing we ever got."

 

If I ever hear Who’s Next again, it’ll be too soon. Same with Dark Side Of the Moon, Appetite For Destruction, Led Zeppelin II and Back In Black.

 

A canon is a canon, and if it exists it's never "finished".

 

But it can rust.

 

I think every album ever released vs every album ever released will have a hell of a lot more white dudes in it, as they have probably made the most pop records over the amount of time that anyone cared to start looking at this stuff.

Sgt Pepper, Blonde On Blonde & Pet Sounds can still have a place in debating the most classic-ever rock record. But I get the author's point that the heads behind the listmaking are changing, and there is tons more diversity of opinion and thus the changing of the "greatest album EVAR" debate.

 

I don't like hip hop and techno - related genres, so the current and future panorama is bleak for me

 

Nowadays everything is rap and electronic. Nobody, neither critics nor aficionados, give a damn about anything else, let alone rock

 

By the way, it seems like if you're white, male, middle aged, and like classic rock instead of hip hop, then you're the worst scum of the earth or something like that.

 

wow! another "old white guys are bad and their music sucks" thread on Hoffman!

shocking -

 

Does he write for Seven Days? If so, I have a good clue who you're talking about...