Originally Posted by
djshiva
I don't think it was posing as a social revolution. It absolutely was one. But like most musical social revolutions, it was co-opted by capitalism and greed.
Look back through the history of music/social revolutions from jazz to rock and roll to reggae to punk rock to hip hop and it's always the same story. Youths tap into new ideas in music, build a social scene around it that challenges the mainstream, party their ****ing brains out, and then some business person realizes that there's money to be made by mass marketing not only the music but the "scene" as well. They water it down for mass consumption, and by the time it's been around a few years, there is only the slightest thread linking it back to what it was.
That doesn't devalue the reality of what it was; it just obscures it so only those interested in the roots ever bother to dig into it.
It didn't "end up" being a "scene". It ended up being a market. And that, ultimately, is what has both frustrated me, and also reminded me of why there is a necessity for a thriving underground.
That dynamic is the ultimate push/pull and the source of many frustrations, at least amongst people that I have been having this conversation with for a while. After so many years involvement, who doesn't want to perhaps make some money, travel a bit? But then you realize what that entails, what kind of commercial pusherman it can tend to make you, always promoting yourself instead of the music. Some people continue with it, others withdraw and try to find different ways to present the music and different sounds to pursue.
That, to me, is the heart of the issue. Are you in it for personal monetary gain? Or for the music and the fantastic community that can arise from music? I think it's essential to constantly scrutinize my own intentions, and I see some of that on a microcosmic scale with people I know. I think that gets lost as things get bigger, as careers get bigger, as paychecks get bigger. As does the "edge" in the music.
Reply With Quote