|
Dirty-South Blues Harp forum: wail on! >
OT-Blues Junction Editorial
OT-Blues Junction Editorial
Page:
1
HarpNinja
3399 posts
Jul 31, 2013
9:50 AM
|
http://bluesjunctionproductions.com/an_editorial_by_david_mac
Interesting editorial, although he seems to be venting on more than one topic, which made it hard to follow, IMO.
I think a much bigger issue in blues is the opposite of "nihilism", but I don't believe this author has ever tried to make money as a blues performer.
If I was a pre-war blues player, I'd actually be kissing the ass of any contemporary blues success. If it weren't for them, there'd be next to no work in my part of the country. Those "traditioanl" acts end up being the 2nd or 3rd tier of blues events. It if wasn't for things like blues-rock (and I hate the genre label thing) band, those events wouldn't be featuring any blues.
If you have any intention of making money in music, you have to understand the importance of relating to the crowd. If they like the music, that is ok.
----------
Mantra Customized Harmonicas
My Website
Last Edited by HarpNinja on Jul 31, 2013 9:51 AM
|
nacoran
6991 posts
Jul 31, 2013
7:17 PM
|
It's a long post and you're right, it wanders from target to target. There is bad music in every genre. Often, when we look back at older music we don't hear the worst of it. I'm sure there has always been terrible blues. Genres often get redefined after the fact. Classic rock stations get away with playing CCR, Van Halen, Warrant and Nirvana in one set. If you plucked the 'original' fans of any one of those bands out of time with a time machine and placed them Bill & Ted's style together they'd call each other posers and break out in a riot. Now they are all 'Classic Rock'. I think it's easy to look back at blues as a monolithic singularity through the lens of time. That tends to lead people to revolt against changes to the 'classic' style. The fact that most of the worst has been buried in the sands of time (sorry, I feel hyperbolic tonight) makes it 'unacceptable' for us to realize there are going to be terrible acts (I know I've butchered some open mics in the learning process). As for self-promotion, payola and it's variants have been around for years. Repetition drives people to want to hear a song again (until you don't ever want to hear it again.) That's what marketing is about.
:)
----------
Nate
Facebook
Thread Organizer (A list of all sorts of useful threads)
|
The Iceman
1063 posts
Aug 01, 2013
4:59 AM
|
One problem is that critics need to label music and put it into some kind of box when music shouldn't be so narrowly defined.
Miles Davis hated this type of labeling. He teasingly said "All music is folk music. It's played by the folks."
----------
The Iceman
|
kudzurunner
4184 posts
Aug 01, 2013
5:17 AM
|
@HarpNinja: This thread is most definitely NOT off-topic (and thanks for starting it!). This forum makes a space for broader themes within the blues world.
It's a curious essay, for all that. He's a ranter more than a writer. I was relieved when, at the very end, after spewing his wrath on multitudes of unnamed "Divazillas," he finally named a few names of female blues artists whose music he enjoys and approves of. Up to that point, he was pure unadulterated anonymized negativity. And his negativity was almost entirely gender based: a menopausal or post-menopausal guy dishing out fury against women blues singers. Uncle Dave is like Clint Eastwood in GRAN TORINO: it's all "grrrrrrrrrrrrr!" against the modern world and the tough talentless b--ches who pour out bad fake blues.
That's what's most surprising and misguided about this piece: it's a gender rant, one that almost entirely ignores the way in which bad contemporary blues is being made by men and boys as well as women. Why no rant against the latest 13-year-old guitar-playing, can't-really-sing blues-boy-sensation? He MENTIONS that specimen of contemporary blues early on, only to slide right past him on his way to flog the b--ches. Same with the pre-teen blues-boy's antiquated equivalent: the ageing metal-head or southern rocker who puts on an inane, Howlin' Wolfish growl, burlesquing the blues without a shred of subtlety rather than actually singing the music. Why not skewer those talentless roadhouse journeymen--and by name? Well, because Uncle Dave might get the snot beaten out of him. But the women are unlikely to do that. They'll just rage, loudly and (as he sees it) hormonally, thus confirming his pronouncements on their lack of subtlety and talent and true bluesness.
Precisely the same scathing critique, in other words, could be leveled at contemporary male "blues" performers, if Mac had wanted to do that or been willing to do that. But he picked an easy target, one that reveals his own flagrant biases.
Last Edited by kudzurunner on Aug 01, 2013 5:25 AM
|
HarpNinja
3400 posts
Aug 01, 2013
6:00 AM
|
He should have just gone after blues payola and inflated reviews. It was like he wanted to go after that but was to hesitant so he took it out on the artists.
I would fully expect, in any genre, that those who can create some hype or bombarded with material to check out all the time...comes with the territory.
I don't know the author, but this sorta rant against women sorta perpetuates the boys' club nature of the blues niche. My biggest frustration with the people in perceived power over the blues market is their disconnect with the roots of the blues.
I find it very troubling that middle-class and upper-middle class baby boomers are the guardians of the music at every level from player to label to booker to what have you. There appears to be a very closed mindset towards the music and its evolution. I am sorry, but the faith bothers me more than the nihilism, especially as it is viewed more often than not with rose colored glasses.
IMO, bluesheads often end up being hypocritical, and at the end of the day, they die on hills that are totally unecessary. I see a huge portion of bluesheads (for lack of a better word) following the same patterns as other social labels like metal heads, hipsters, yuppies, whatever.
It becomes more about a lifestyle - that does NOT parallel the experience of the first generations blues stars - than the music. For every solid blues rock player there are several really shitty traditional players.
I am now guilty of the same sort of ranting at the editorial, but I get frustrated by the commentary that only certain people can own the blues and decide its fate, when in fact, those people are no more entitled to the music than anyone else. Will I listen to the editorializing of guys like James Cotton and Charlie Musselwhite, yes. Non-performing white guys who are self proclaimed experts on the music because they post reviews, no.
----------
Mantra Customized Harmonicas
My Website
Last Edited by HarpNinja on Aug 01, 2013 6:01 AM
|
HarpNinja
3401 posts
Aug 01, 2013
6:06 AM
|
I really truly believe that people would rather suffer than change. There is a lot of actual evidence and research proving that. It is no mistake why blues has ended up so appealing to its current core demographic - middle aged white baby boomers.
Blues music represents a constant. It is discussed in terms of black and white (as in no shades of grey), and like many things historic, people can take comfort in its perceived solidity. It serves as a metaphor for the Ego's struggle with impermanence. The fact that it wasn't as mainstream as other music of a generation ago makes it even more appealing - it feels sheltered from the impact of greater cultural change.
----------
Mantra Customized Harmonicas
My Website
|
Tuckster
1302 posts
Aug 01, 2013
6:49 AM
|
If you want to find the true blues lovers in a room full of blues fans,put on a Robert Johnson or Skip James record and see who's left in the room when the record ends. That's my cynical,extreme purist side coming out after hearing the upteenth blues rock band at a weekend "blues" festival. I don't mind blues rock,but please,don't call yourself a blues band if that's what you play.
I'm fairly involved in my local blues society. We get scads of recordings submitted to us for review.A lot of it isn't even close to what I call blues. Fortunately,if I don't like it,I don't have to review it.It may go to someone else who does like it and writes a review. Our members run the gamut from the casual Clapton/Hendrix/Vaughan blues lover to the rabid purist blues lover.I say there's room for them all. As long as there is that grain of love for blues,there's hope they can expand their horizons.
Although the Divazillas hit a chord with me,I,too, kept thinking-what about their male counterparts?
P.S. Out of about 300 members,I can only recall 3 members who are black. Just sayin".
Last Edited by Tuckster on Aug 01, 2013 6:52 AM
|
Post a Message
|
