"Thus negating your idea that it was ever a none for profit or artistic pursuit"
-when did i make a comment about the enterprise of indie rock bands?
"The indie "sound" and aesthetic values, I believe, were actually accidents of production based on limitations (be that money or musical know-how), which then become codified as part of the genre."
the point being? regardless of how the sound arose, it still continues to lack any musical innovation and relies upon age old hooks to make uptight white people dance. this, is why i question the strong devotion. i understand devotion to the underground (the bands that produce, manufacture, and distribute their music on their own (hence, 'independent')), but the bands that inspires most of these alleged indie rock kids to gyrate their hips do nothing of the sort, yet still maintain the label of 'indie rock' by those who obviously do not fully understand the implications of the label itself.
"Make sense, no? The rest, the faux grunge styling, the elitiest vision of independent rock is just pretense and has nothing to do with the movement itself, though is often associated with it."
no, it doesn;t as this entire comment of yours has little to do with my post with the exception that it deals with the same subject matter. i am railing against those who adopt the qualities that you mentioned while claiming that they belong to this indie rock movement, which, in reality, is not independent at all, just not mainstream. i understand that these "pretenses" have nothing to do with the 'real' movement. my commentary focused (at least, that's what i was trying to convey - perhaps my rhetoric left too much open) upon the perversion of said movement, and my irritation that stems from that.
-when did i make a comment about the enterprise of indie rock bands?
"The indie "sound" and aesthetic values, I believe, were actually accidents of production based on limitations (be that money or musical know-how), which then become codified as part of the genre."
the point being? regardless of how the sound arose, it still continues to lack any musical innovation and relies upon age old hooks to make uptight white people dance. this, is why i question the strong devotion. i understand devotion to the underground (the bands that produce, manufacture, and distribute their music on their own (hence, 'independent')), but the bands that inspires most of these alleged indie rock kids to gyrate their hips do nothing of the sort, yet still maintain the label of 'indie rock' by those who obviously do not fully understand the implications of the label itself.
"Make sense, no? The rest, the faux grunge styling, the elitiest vision of independent rock is just pretense and has nothing to do with the movement itself, though is often associated with it."
no, it doesn;t as this entire comment of yours has little to do with my post with the exception that it deals with the same subject matter. i am railing against those who adopt the qualities that you mentioned while claiming that they belong to this indie rock movement, which, in reality, is not independent at all, just not mainstream. i understand that these "pretenses" have nothing to do with the 'real' movement. my commentary focused (at least, that's what i was trying to convey - perhaps my rhetoric left too much open) upon the perversion of said movement, and my irritation that stems from that.
Reply
Leave a comment