Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 76 to 78 of 78
  1. #76
    Jah Womble's Avatar
    Lapped the world not once but twice - with tread to spare
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Balham, London
    Posts
    12,795
    Teams
    The patch, the pitch, the Poch...
    Biscuit
    Pepperidge Farm Cinnamon Apple Crunch
    Actor
    Virginia McKenna in drag
    I don't know, the shadow he cast was pretty sizeable. (In a couple of senses, if not artistically.)

    You're right in this sense though. Looking back - while attempting to disassociate from his later infamy - it's hard to determine what Glitter's talent 'was', to be honest. His act borrowed to some extent from early sixties Larry Parnes-type pop stars, adding football-chant lyrics and thudding beat, with its protagonist then fashioned as some kind of torch-bearer for the 'hod-carriers in Boots #7'-chic that followed.

    But glamorous he was not: placed next to Bowie or Bolan, Glitter and his gang more closely resembled those Saturday-afternoon wrestlers, tbh. Should've been Kent Walton introducing him on TOTP rather than Tony Blackburn.

  2. #77
    Quote Originally Posted by Janik View Post
    Discussions like this tend to treat each generation as being in the same boat. But I don't think that is right. The experience for a teenager these days is entirely dissimilar to one from the 1980s, in a very specific way - pop music only really started being created 25 years before that. There was music beforehand for sure, but really not in the same way of being something particularly made for and aimed at young people.

    One dynamic that won't change is rejecting the music of the preceding generation from your own. That is important as it is marking out your own space. It is vital to be able to tell your Mum and Dad that 'you don't get it!' and know that this is really true. But consider how that differs from someone born in 1970 to someone born in 2000 - for those with the older birth date, all previous pop music belonged to their parents generation. So it was all in the 'already taken' basket. It was only new stuff that was untainted by association for them to explore and claim. But for a millennial, there are bands and musicians that their parents reject or have never even heard of because they were before their time, but who have interesting cannons. So kids now can grow their musical taste in two directions - forwards and backwards, and still feel like it's theirs. The accessibility of music of all ages on new technology also helps considerably with this.
    Get that younger generations have a much broader range to listen to & technology makes it easier to assimilate. What has been overlooked is that our generation no longer have the same disconnect we had with our parents. Through having children born late 80s/early 90s I have grown up with their tastes & am comfortable with it. Likewise both my kids are as happy to listen to 70s & 80s music as I still am. That 'you dont get it' dynamic is getting ever narrower & less frequent.

  3. #78
    Quote Originally Posted by Jah Womble View Post
    I don't know, the shadow he cast was pretty sizeable. (In a couple of senses, if not artistically.)

    You're right in this sense though. Looking back - while attempting to disassociate from his later infamy - it's hard to determine what Glitter's talent 'was', to be honest. His act borrowed to some extent from early sixties Larry Parnes-type pop stars, adding football-chant lyrics and thudding beat, with its protagonist then fashioned as some kind of torch-bearer for the 'hod-carriers in Boots #7'-chic that followed.

    But glamorous he was not: placed next to Bowie or Bolan, Glitter and his gang more closely resembled those Saturday-afternoon wrestlers, tbh. Should've been Kent Walton introducing him on TOTP rather than Tony Blackburn.
    With the exception of Bowie Bolan Mott or Roxy dont think glam has ever been taken seriously. The brickies in mascara & 50's chancers who saw a window of opportunity are more typical of the canon. My understanding of this thread was that bands have an influence out of all proportion to their commercial success while others have commercial success out of all proportion to their influence.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •