trilonaut wrote:Minotaur029 wrote:We're too sterlie to be dated.
Stanhope wrote:"You know how bars will re-live generations?...how are we gonna re-live this decade? How do we re-live this? In 30 years, come on down and re-live the fuckin'...'aughts ['00]....Come on down and just dress up like a normal guy in a normal shirt, with a normal haircut and look like the guy next to you with a baseball cap on...it'll be just like the '90s without any good music."
anything can date. there are always trends. we aren't "normal guys and gals in normal shirts and haircuts", this time period has fashions like any other. i think if anything the issue is not that this period is so "normal" or indistinct, it's that there is so much retro crap that the fashion is basically an ugly mishmash of recycled things from other decades.
one aesthetic that i do feel is distinctly of this decade is that really hideous intentionally clashing bright colors glam-nausea "heh heh it's so trashy" associated with crappy hipsters, "electro-clash", various noise bands, and bands like hella and lightning bolt. give me the stupid ransom note "extreme" typewriter typeface stuff of the 90s over this anyday. apparently this aesthetic was conceived by some kids at RISD... well, thumbs down.
i feel like this decade is some mutant version of the 80s plus internet and an even worse political situation.
I've noticed the hipsters taking on this like...ironic "wigger" culture as their own. They're like...hyperactive hipsters or something...perhaps products of an age of information abundance? It's like a really bad '80s period without a source you can put your finger on. They like Girl Talk and the most wildly overproduced shit. They're into like...genreless music...old timey fake bands with keyboards (Decemberist type stuff [I make a horrifically ugly face here]).
This is Pitchfork's fucking fault. The other Pitchfork-like sites still take their cues from this one. It's this Pitchfork culture that prevents kids from knowing that there are bands that can still bring the rock. Bands on the cutting edge of rock are ignored or are given somewhere from a 6.5 to a 7.9...the reviewers don't "get it," or can't differentiate it from similar albums...but they know it's "cool" so they give it an essentially neutral review, and it falls through the cracks.
Somehow from this, Architecture in Helsinki becomes cool. As for that process, I couldn't really tell ya how they get there...
In conclusion...how can a decade that is proving to just be a mish-mash of all the other decades (with an emphasis on the worst parts of the '80s) be dated? How
will we relive this decade at the bar?
P.S.--The newest hot record? Feist. Have you
heard Feist? Who gives a shit? BORING. Hot lady writes sackless songs. I think I can feel her nü-indie hipster ego seep out through her promo pictures.
At least Cat Power had heart (and occasionally cajones [and one spectacular album])...at least Joanna Newsom has talent (albeit an annoying, gimmicky talent)...Feist doesn't even touch either one of the aforementioned...a midget among the mediocre.
kerble wrote:Ernest Goes to Jail In Your Ass