homophobic musicians

111
BClark wrote: i'm at this point wasting the forum members time..
I wanted to be a troll and run a parade of post(s) about how ignorant I am. I am going to leave this thread alone for the rest of my life.


FYP.

Thank you for playing.

Goodbye.
Animals are something invented by plants to move seeds around. An extremely yang solution to a peculiar problem which they faced. T. Mckenna

homophobic musicians

112
Man everyone is jumping on the bandwagon to make BClark into some kind of monster (sorry Lars). I think he just made some faulty statements, and in defending himself left loose ends in his logic. I know when ten people jump down anyone's throat at once, one does't always think long enough before they respond and thus can be prone to errors that give further fuel to their detractors. BClark shouldn't have tried to defend himself cuz he dug his hole deeper, but I think everyone else should get off their high fucking horse and chillax. I can only imagine some of the bullshit statements that have come out of some of your mouths in your lives, but you are lucky that your mistakes haven't been exposed on this particular thread. Everyone makes faux pas, but the errors do not necessarily reflect on the person as a whole.

Oh and guess what...famous musicians are not your friends, they are random strangers that make music. Being a fan of the tunes does not require subscription to their cult of personality. If you like their music it should have nothing to do with their religion, sexual orientation or politics. I suppose this applies differently to rappers as their words are their music, but you get my drift.

After thinking about this, I will admit that I do include my opinions of a person for some types of music, specifically ego-driven rock. I don't like much music that is oriented around dynamic or charismatic people, but there are some decent groups where the frontman's attitude is integral to the whole package. The thing is, I assume these jokers are dickheads in real life, so if I hear they are racist homophobic or sexist then I'm not suprised (I'm lookin' at you, James Brown). For the most part I avoid this type of music, eschewing it for instrumentally talent-based groups. If the music can stand by itself, well I'm not going to find a Miles lick unlistenable because he tortures kittens.
Last edited by Boombats_Archive on Mon Oct 08, 2007 9:46 am, edited 1 time in total.
www.myspace.com/pissedplanet
www.myspace.com/hookerdraggerlives

homophobic musicians

114
madlee wrote:
Josef K wrote:Here's a quote from another board that I use. It is an answer to a statement I made regarding the appreciation of aesthetics of something with questionable ethical / moral motives.

Aesthetical judgment( whether you like some piece of art or not) shouldn't have nothing to do with moral principles. If you talk about approving or disapproving art in an ethical way- you're not talking about art and aesthetics anymore.




everything is political. it doesn't exist in a fucking vacuum. any art that pretends it is above it is clearly in the ivory tower...and right wing.

art is merely a reflection of our values. there is no such thing as an avant-garde which is merely a marketing term used by the art world.



What the writer in the quote was asserting is that aesthetic pleasure or revulsion is an automatic or natural reflex. So ethical / moral parameters are evaluated and applied afterwards and therefore are not part of the true artisitc evaluation.

The original discussion was based around the question 'Is it wrong to appreciate aesthetics of an image just because it is used to promote something with questionable ethics?'.

homophobic musicians

116
Boombats wrote:Man everyone is jumping on the bandwagon to make BClark into some kind of monster (sorry Lars).

No, I think he's a "regular cunt." By that I mean that if you go into any regular bar during tonight's playoff game and find any other regular cunt in the bar, he'd say basically the same thing, "I'm no racist, but gay ass sex is disgusting, so I understand if you don't like the gays, that's cool."

Regular cunt. Not a monster, just no different from your regular average cunt in a bar.
steve albini
Electrical Audio
sa at electrical dot com
Quicumque quattuor feles possidet insanus est.

homophobic musicians

120
Rick Reuben wrote:Elvis Presley: racist,


You make a good point, and your list is a solid one. But this particular one: possibly off the mark. I thought this was an interesting read, in any case--

Op-Ed Contributor in the New York Times wrote:How Did Elvis Get Turned Into a Racist?
PETER GURALNICK
Published: August 11, 2007

Sometimes he would preface it with the 1951 Hank Williams recitation “Men With Broken Hearts,” which may well have been South’s original inspiration. “You’ve never walked in that man’s shoes/Or saw things through his eyes/Or stood and watched with helpless hands/While the heart inside you dies.” For Elvis these two songs were as much about social justice as empathy and understanding: “Help your brother along the road,” the Hank Williams number concluded, “No matter where you start/For the God that made you made them, too/These men with broken hearts.”

In Elvis’s case, this simple lesson was not just a matter of paying lip service to an abstract principle.

It was what he believed, it was what his music had stood for from the start: the breakdown of barriers, both musical and racial. This is not, unfortunately, how it is always perceived 30 years after his death, the anniversary of which is on Thursday. When the singer Mary J. Blige expressed her reservations about performing one of his signature songs, she only gave voice to a view common in the African-American community. “I prayed about it,” she said, “because I know Elvis was a racist.”

And yet, as the legendary Billboard editor Paul Ackerman, a devotee of English Romantic poetry as well as rock ’n’ roll, never tired of pointing out, the music represented not just an amalgam of America’s folk traditions (blues, gospel, country) but a bold restatement of an egalitarian ideal. “In one aspect of America’s cultural life,” Ackerman wrote in 1958, “integration has already taken place.”

It was due to rock ’n’ roll, he emphasized, that groundbreaking artists like Big Joe Turner, Ray Charles, Chuck Berry and Little Richard, who would only recently have been confined to the “race” market, had acquired a broad-based pop following, while the music itself blossomed neither as a regional nor a racial phenomenon but as a joyful new synthesis “rich with Negro and hillbilly lore.”

No one could have embraced Paul Ackerman’s formulation more forcefully (or more fully) than Elvis Presley.

Asked to characterize his singing style when he first presented himself for an audition at the Sun recording studio in Memphis, Elvis said that he sang all kinds of music — “I don’t sound like nobody.” This, as it turned out, was far more than the bravado of an 18-year-old who had never sung in public before. It was in fact as succinct a definition as one might get of the democratic vision that fueled his music, a vision that denied distinctions of race, of class, of category, that embraced every kind of music equally, from the highest up to the lowest down.

It was, of course, in his embrace of black music that Elvis came in for his fiercest criticism. On one day alone, Ackerman wrote, he received calls from two Nashville music executives demanding in the strongest possible terms that Billboard stop listing Elvis’s records on the best-selling country chart because he played black music. He was simply seen as too low class, or perhaps just too no-class, in his refusal to deny recognition to a segment of society that had been rendered invisible by the cultural mainstream.

“Down in Tupelo, Mississippi,” Elvis told a white reporter for The Charlotte Observer in 1956, he used to listen to Arthur Crudup, the blues singer who originated “That’s All Right,” Elvis’s first record. Crudup, he said, used to “bang his box the way I do now, and I said if I ever got to the place where I could feel all old Arthur felt, I’d be a music man like nobody ever saw.”

It was statements like these that caused Elvis to be seen as something of a hero in the black community in those early years. In Memphis the two African-American newspapers, The Memphis World and The Tri-State Defender, hailed him as a “race man” — not just for his music but also for his indifference to the usual social distinctions. In the summer of 1956, The World reported, “the rock ’n’ roll phenomenon cracked Memphis’s segregation laws” by attending the Memphis Fairgrounds amusement park “during what is designated as ‘colored night.’”

That same year, Elvis also attended the otherwise segregated WDIA Goodwill Revue, an annual charity show put on by the radio station that called itself the “Mother Station of the Negroes.” In the aftermath of the event, a number of Negro newspapers printed photographs of Elvis with both Rufus Thomas and B.B. King (“Thanks, man, for all the early lessons you gave me,” were the words The Tri-State Defender reported he said to Mr. King).

When he returned to the revue the following December, a stylish shot of him “talking shop” with Little Junior Parker and Bobby “Blue” Bland appeared in Memphis’s mainstream afternoon paper, The Press-Scimitar, accompanied by a short feature that made Elvis’s feelings abundantly clear. “It was the real thing,” he said, summing up both performance and audience response. “Right from the heart.”

Just how committed he was to a view that insisted not just on musical accomplishment but fundamental humanity can be deduced from his reaction to the earliest appearance of an ugly rumor that has persisted in one form or another to this day. Elvis Presley, it was said increasingly within the African-American community, had declared, either at a personal appearance in Boston or on Edward R. Murrow’s “Person to Person” television program, “The only thing Negroes can do for me is buy my records and shine my shoes.”

That he had never appeared in Boston or on Murrow’s program did nothing to abate the rumor, and so in June 1957, long after he had stopped talking to the mainstream press, he addressed the issue — and an audience that scarcely figured in his sales demographic — in an interview for the black weekly Jet.

Anyone who knew him, he told reporter Louie Robinson, would immediately recognize that he could never have uttered those words. Amid testimonials from black people who did know him, he described his attendance as a teenager at the church of celebrated black gospel composer, the Rev. W. Herbert Brewster, whose songs had been recorded by Mahalia Jackson and Clara Ward and whose stand on civil rights was well known in the community. (Elvis’s version of “Peace in the Valley,” said Dr. Brewster later, was “one of the best gospel recordings I’ve ever heard.”)

The interview’s underlying point was the same as the underlying point of his music: far from asserting any superiority, he was merely doing his best to find a place in a musical continuum that included breathtaking talents like Ray Charles, Roy Hamilton, the Five Blind Boys of Mississippi and Howlin’ Wolf on the one hand, Hank Williams, Bill Monroe and the Statesmen Quartet on the other. “Let’s face it,” he said of his rhythm and blues influences, “nobody can sing that kind of music like colored people. I can’t sing it like Fats Domino can. I know that.”

And as for prejudice, the article concluded, quoting an unnamed source, “To Elvis people are people, regardless of race, color or creed.”

So why didn’t the rumor die? Why did it continue to find common acceptance up to, and past, the point that Chuck D of Public Enemy could declare in 1990, “Elvis was a hero to most... straight-up racist that sucker was, simple and plain”?

Chuck D has long since repudiated that view for a more nuanced one of cultural history, but the reason for the rumor’s durability, the unassailable logic behind its common acceptance within the black community rests quite simply on the social inequities that have persisted to this day, the fact that we live in a society that is no more perfectly democratic today than it was 50 years ago. As Chuck D perceptively observes, what does it mean, within this context, for Elvis to be hailed as “king,” if Elvis’s enthronement obscures the striving, the aspirations and achievements of so many others who provided him with inspiration?

Elvis would have been the first to agree. When a reporter referred to him as the “king of rock ’n’ roll” at the press conference following his 1969 Las Vegas opening, he rejected the title, as he always did, calling attention to the presence in the room of his friend Fats Domino, “one of my influences from way back.” The larger point, of course, was that no one should be called king; surely the music, the American musical tradition that Elvis so strongly embraced, could stand on its own by now, after crossing all borders of race, class and even nationality.

“The lack of prejudice on the part of Elvis Presley,” said Sam Phillips, the Sun Records founder who discovered him, “had to be one of the biggest things that ever happened. It was almost subversive, sneaking around through the music, but we hit things a little bit, don’t you think?”

Or, as Jake Hess, the incomparable lead singer for the Statesmen Quartet and one of Elvis’s lifelong influences, pointed out: “Elvis was one of those artists, when he sang a song, he just seemed to live every word of it. There’s other people that have a voice that’s maybe as great or greater than Presley’s, but he had that certain something that everybody searches for all during their lifetime.”

To do justice to that gift, to do justice to the spirit of the music, we have to extend ourselves sometimes beyond the narrow confines of our own experience, we have to challenge ourselves to embrace the democratic principle of the music itself, which may in the end be its most precious gift.

Peter Guralnick is the author of “Careless Love: The Unmaking of Elvis Presley.”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests