Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The past is a foreign country, but the recent past—the 00s, the 90s, even a lot of the 80s—looks almost identical to the present. This is the First Great Paradox of Contemporary Cultural History.
There does seem to be a certain "calcification" of pop culture in recent years. No one would confuse a pop song from 1958 with a song from 1968, but a pop song from 2001 is pretty much the same as one from 2011.
It's cause it actually WAS still good in the 80's and 90's. You CAN compare a song by Aliyah, blackstreet, mj, prince, ratm, metallica, Oingo boingo, nirvana, shania twain, rancid, depeche mode, pet shop boys, beastie boys, soul II soul, fine young canibals, veruca salt, hole, soundgarden, boogie down production, pantera, sublime, pennywise, rancid, bad religion, and heck, even Millie Vanilli WITH today.
Lamers took over. That's why say what u will. We know it's true. Difference between the 80/90s pop artists and today's??
80/90's artists still looked up to people like elvis, beatles, marvin gaye, smokey robinson, roger and zapp, georgle clinton, jaco pastorius, bootsy collins, as inspiration. They were the 'kids' of the 80's and 90's using legends of the 50s/60s/70's as inspiration.
Todays kids, are looking at the 80's/90's artists as inspiration!!! They were still supposed to be looking at the elvis, beatles, bootsys, etc...
They got that wrong.
Basially, the teachers taught the students, but then the next era looked at the students thinking those were the 'legends' instead of still looking at the actual legends.
Those old legends, of the pre-MTV/internet years are still the standard, but they're not being followed.
For example every new bass player wants to be "Flea". They should be instead wanting to be James Jamerson.
they can't tell the difference between that. THIS is a result of ease of influence, such as internet and what not. It's the result of kids not having to seek and discover like we did before the internet. It's a result of kids being born to the kids of our era, who grew up on those artists listed above, yet.. no longer cared about it so much to pass on to their kids, just hands them an iPad and says keep yourself busy...
So, kids basically don't know or have those same original influences. They're influenced by the influenced... It's like, if I wanted to be an artist, I study picasso or dali. I don't study the kid who studied picasso and is now a contemporary artist. I go to the source. Kids no longer go to the source. They are influenced by a bunch of middlemen.
We have devolved as a society and culture. We are doomed.
Devolved. Just the word I thought of. It hasn't stalled, its taking a nosedive. At some point (I hope) an artist will blow everyone away and create a new style of pop music.
It's cause it actually WAS still good in the 80's and 90's. You CAN compare a song by Aliyah, blackstreet, mj, prince, ratm, metallica, Oingo boingo, nirvana, shania twain, rancid, depeche mode, pet shop boys, beastie boys, soul II soul, fine young canibals, veruca salt, hole, soundgarden, boogie down production, pantera, sublime, pennywise, rancid, bad religion, and heck, even Millie Vanilli WITH today.
Lamers took over. That's why say what u will. We know it's true. Difference between the 80/90s pop artists and today's??
80/90's artists still looked up to people like elvis, beatles, marvin gaye, smokey robinson, roger and zapp, georgle clinton, jaco pastorius, bootsy collins, as inspiration. They were the 'kids' of the 80's and 90's using legends of the 50s/60s/70's as inspiration.
Todays kids, are looking at the 80's/90's artists as inspiration!!! They were still supposed to be looking at the elvis, beatles, bootsys, etc...
They got that wrong.
Basially, the teachers taught the students, but then the next era looked at the students thinking those were the 'legends' instead of still looking at the actual legends.
Those old legends, of the pre-MTV/internet years are still the standard, but they're not being followed.
For example every new bass player wants to be "Flea". They should be instead wanting to be James Jamerson.
they can't tell the difference between that. THIS is a result of ease of influence, such as internet and what not. It's the result of kids not having to seek and discover like we did before the internet. It's a result of kids being born to the kids of our era, who grew up on those artists listed above, yet.. no longer cared about it so much to pass on to their kids, just hands them an iPad and says keep yourself busy...
So, kids basically don't know or have those same original influences. They're influenced by the influenced... It's like, if I wanted to be an artist, I study picasso or dali. I don't study the kid who studied picasso and is now a contemporary artist. I go to the source. Kids no longer go to the source. They are influenced by a bunch of middlemen.
I respectfully disagree, in that the 90's was the big decade for culture to look back to the 60's. I believe that the 80's were the last decade of the evolution of pop culture. The 80's featured bands such as Iron Maiden and Slayer which dwarfed the whole 90's touchy-feely "I wrote a song about how everything sucks" thing. That whole movement was borrowed from the 60's, complete with crappily tuned drum tracks, etc.
However, songs such as Slayer's Raining Blood or Metallica's Master of Puppets don't have such a datemark on them and are considered classics, unlike most 90's stuff which has fallen out of fashion.
I guess the wider question would be, why should young musicians want to keep working within the rock or rap or pop "idioms" at all? Were kids in the 1960's dutifully learning how to play the oboe so they could be part of the neighborhood garage big-band? It seems as though pop music evolution used to be a lot more rapid in the past, despite the easy availability of mixing and recording technology in modern times.
Perhaps its getting older, and not being young anymore - but it certainly seems like there is no really good music around, films are very derivative and younger people generally bore me - they have nothing original or interesting to say.
- perhaps when you get older you adopt a seen it all before attitude and explore less things, your more cynical therefore you see less joy, when your younger you take joy in small things, as its all new.
I think a decade or the music, or the spirit of a time only becomes recognisable when you look back on it from a distance - like the 90s at the time, I am sure there were people saying 80s were better,
As long as popular culture exists, it will always evolve. But is "evolution" the right word for it? No, I think what's happening to our culture is best described as evil-ution. Moral decay. The profileration of evil.
We categorize pop culture after the fact. Nobody would notice difference in music or TV from 1989 to 1991 or from 1959 to 1962 either.
There is already a clear difference between what we remember most from the 90s vs the 00s and the same will be true about the teens; but we probably won't notice it until the 20's
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
say what u will. We know it's true. Difference between the 80/90s pop artists and today's?? 
