Where is the world coming to?

You hear it when you go to a hockey game,
you hear it in Britney's songs, in commercials,
you hear rock music everywhere.
Thats not strange. Not these days.
But in the beginning, the rockers were rebels
and the music was banned from radio, tv, everywhere.
I think that was one of the good thing about rock.
I dont want to hear Guns n roses when I go to a hockey
game, and I dont want to hear Led Zeppelin on a
car-commercial. The music loses its.. ..capacity.
Rock has been accepted and integrated in our society
to the point of no return.
Now that doesnt have to be bad, but I think its
gone a bit too far.
What do you think?

Rock was never seperated form the mainstream, it just pretended to be. Like all the "alternative" bands that go on MTV. THe only difference is that people have realised that the whole Rock/rebellion thing was a con, and have moved on.

When I read that Led Zep had sold out to a car company (it was Cadillac wasn't it?) I threw my hands up, then threw the paper out!

What a sell out...

It think its a good thing that all types off music is played where ever and whenever. It just shows that people as a whole have more exceptance toward all walk of life and styles of music for that matter. and as far as Led Zepplin selling out thats a crock. Led Zepplin took some easy money great for them I would if I had the chance!

I agree with zeb. I am a working musician and songwriter, and if you can get your music played in any way shape or form and get PAID for it, more power to you. I'm sure alot of you guitar slingers out there will agree with me. Myself, I would love to see a brand new Thunderbird rolling across my TV screen with a hot babe at the wheel and my song blaring in the back ground while I sign the royalty check!

Check out how much royalty can roll down in your bank account for only one song that's played in a TV show (like ... the 'Friends' tune)... I'd write a rap tune if I had to!!!

Originally posted by SRVLIVES
When I read that Led Zep had sold out to a car company (it was Cadillac wasn't it?) I threw my hands up, then threw the paper out!

What a sell out...

Well, I don't know for sure, but chances are that the copy right is so old on that song that they had no voice in the matter.

Or did they write a new tune for the commercial? I don't watch TV so I have no idea what song was used or how.

I dont think it's a sell out at tall...
I mean those songs weren't "comercailly concieved", so the songs still have that same meaning and depth and sencerity.. it's just getting aired more than normal. Do you know what i mean?
I mean punk is to me a great form of music, not your mindless skate punk, but bands like "the dead kennedies", and thier songs are quite clever and rebelious, and pretty much against the whole corprate thing. Would i think that they had sold out if thier music was played on a nike comercail? No, course not, cos the songs are exactly the same, they still hold thier integrety...
It's what happens before the recording that's important in regard to the whole "selling out" issue... I mean, I would view alot bands who write music to sell as "sell outs", but poeple who write music as a form of expression, and after they've finished, that's that, what ever they do after that doesn't affect that recording... I'm explaining this very badly...
It's like Iggy pop's music, it was rebellious, and true to punk nature... and wasn't selling... A couple of decades later the songs appear on some adds and they start to sell... those songs are still exactly the same, and he didn't write it for those commercials so he didn't sell out...
ps: there's nothing wrong with "selling out", just i would preffer to keep my music sinceir... I might change my mind when i'm in need of money. lol

Bardsley was right when he said that most of the "rebellion" associated with rock music is just an image. Rock is about music, not image. IMOP the best part about hockey is when they play the intro to welcome to the jungle before a face off or something.

I mean no offence,but I don't know what it is with people and wanting to be seen as different,alternative,cool,whatever.
Why is rock being accepted into the mainstream a problem?Was being a rebel an end unto itself or a means to an end?Did you simply want to be seen to be listening to something different,"rebellious",or did you want people to respect and appreciate what you listen to?Or what you play?And to respect your musical genious,if at all you have any?To respect your chosen form of musical expression?

hmm, becuase the drive for some great music is rebelion, and it's power and rawkus nature does fit the message... it's not to do with being cool, but the actaul music in it self... Listen to Amen's song "too hard to be free" or "coma america", these songs are just plain angry, and they can make this emotion sound good... if they were to maintain this same style and start to promote being a vegitarain in thier lyrics, it just wouldn't work as well... the are problem's with contradicting your music...
You dont have to actually BE rebelious, but that idea has to come across well for it to work...

I'm not sure if i agree completely with bardsly, I do see where he's comming from, but have you heard of Paul Robson? The bass singer who was also very pro communisim during america's most sensitive period to communisim (he was also black), and he wasn't a punk rocker or anything, but it was reblelious, and has inspired marxist bands.
I'll continue this later, i can smell food :D

[Edited by educatedfilm on 05-06-2002 at 11:27 AM]

Originally posted by kingdavid
I mean no offence,but I don't know what it is with people and wanting to be seen as different,alternative,cool,whatever. Why is rock being accepted into the mainstream a problem?...

The simple answer is that Rock'n'Roll used to be a very, very, scary thing.

I'm old enough to remember when Elvis Presley appeared on the Ed Sullivan show, and the camera men were ordered to frame their shots so that he was only shown on-air from the waist up.

Take a look at some old photos of Little Richard. Then look at some photos, from the same years, of 'average' white, suburban, middle-class, families! The very term Rock'n'Roll was a sexual reference that came from the black Jazz sub-culture. And there were rumours whirling around that Jerry Lee Lewis (Great Balls Of Fire) had married his 13-year-old cousin! :eek:

I don't mean to sound condesending, but the generation that grew up with the music that came out of this period, and helped to create the music of the 60's and 70's :cool:, just doesn't have quite the same capacity for knee-jerk shock that gratified the rebels of the 50's.

That's a sad thing, in a way, because the rigid, repressive values of the 50's were (rightly) torn down, but they weren't replaced by any set of core values - any belief system to anchor people, or give them a solid sense of themselves, or their role in society.

wow, that's your 777 post lord...
yeah, i agree with you that rock 'n roll took away, but didn't give anything back... so in a sense it was just anarchistic... but with some stuff now (eg rage against the machine) they are putting out REAL messages, wether you love or hate the guys, they are talking about serious issues, and trying to add something...

Originally posted by educatedfilm
...they are talking about serious issues, and trying to add something...

One can always hope!

Too many of my generation abdicated their responsibilities, leaving others to make decisions for them. The federal politcal situation here in Canada reminds me uncomfortably of the American scene described in "Monster" by Steppenwolf. (You think today's music has anger? Check that one out!)

BTW: Thanks for noticing the post number. At the rate I've been mouthing-off lately, I might even catch up to "La Limace Folle and The Grizzled Veteran"... OOOH! Song Title! (Gotta go now.)

lol, heheheh, what did happen to steppen warf?
Yeah, but the difference between the 50's and 60's is massive, a publically pro communist attitude in the fifties could result in attempts on your life, having your passport taken away, or worse, refused entry back in.. by the sixties it had changed, and being anti the goverenmt (and capitalism) was kinda more accepted, but that may have to do with the doubts over vietnam, and the huge swell for suppourt for the black power movement..

NOw songs like "ifwhiteamericatoldthetruthforonedayitsworldwouldfallapart" is just another politicaly charged rock tune... and oasis saying they're bigger than god just went as another borish little stunt, and no one really cared...
but to be honest, I'm a little worried about comprimising ideas and lyrics to make music more universal and family friendly... I mean, if it's not suitable to kids, dont sell it to em, dont change the music.

Saying all that rebellion can go waaaaayyyyy too far.
Iggy pop, kinda was one of the first lot that started to go too far back in the early 70's, sadly back then it was his self harming (he used to slash his chest and belly with razors or glass) and jerking off in the middle of a set that got him attention..
20 years after the early iggy, we saw richie from the manics had slashed "4real" into his arms, and the gashes were huge, and he had his photo taken like this... and it generated alot of fuss, because what was the point of this? sure it was the self destruction of rock and roll, but what had he achieved in the processs?
30 years after the early iggy, we now see chasy choas from amen slashing his big beefy arms in the middle of his set... I mean, there are bands like disturbed who use fake blood etc etc, but Chasy was actually doing this for real on stage and was getting rushed to hospial.. but again what's the point? it certainly getting his attention, but what's so bad that drove him to that? sure he's scaring the crap out of the conservative middle classes like we'd all love to, but isn't he diverting attention from he real message rather than promoting it?

Well this got pretty blown up indeed.
I didnt mean that the rockers should be some
outcasts that everybody hated.
I just thought it had gone too far.

Originally posted by kimbob
..Myself, I would love to see a brand new Thunderbird rolling across my TV screen with a hot babe at the wheel and my song blaring in the back ground while I sign the royalty check!

Sure, but would you like to hear your song blaring in the
back of a diaper-commercial? I wouldnt.
And someone said rock isnt about image, of course it is!
Image is and will probably always be a part of rock-music.
Go ask ANY rock-band if the image doesnt matter.

A Swedish girl-band called "Shebang" recently did a disco-cover on "Sheena is a punkrocker".
This is the kind of things I just dont like.
I cant listen to the song anymore.
I dont argue the fact that its good for rock-music to be
available to everyone, but when it appears in diaper-commercials, when the disco-versions start popping up and
so on I think its gone too far.
Of course you can argue back and forth, but as far as Im concerned, the rock-music is definetely being abused today.
And I dont like it.

I'd definitely love to be abused and get paid 200 bucks for every airing of my song...

I agree that it hurts a bit to hear good rock music being used in a commercial..so like will they use Pink Floyd's "young lust" to sell feminine hygiene products next? Or maybe use Ozzy's "crazy train" for an Amtrac commercial. I think it will be a sign of the apocalypse. :mad:

Originally posted by mc9mm
...but as far as Im concerned, the rock-music is definetely being abused today.

And I dont like it.

LOL, wait 'til you start to recognize your favourite songs being played in [u]elevators[/u]! Mwahahahahaaa :D

Originally posted by yukonc5
Or maybe use Ozzy's "crazy train" for an Amtrac commercial.

LOL!!!!!! . . . with all the crashes they've had lately that might actually work.