4 ms·
Sure, but one cant deny the music of the late 60s and 70s changed a lot of human culture. But we dont have revolutionary music such as led zepplin, pink floyd,
by samstave 3y ago
Sure, but one cant deny the music of the late 60s and 70s changed a lot of human culture.
But we dont have revolutionary music such as led zepplin, pink floyd, etc in the current crop.
none of the above sought facade public images as much as every single 'influencing' pop-stars today.
Their influence was organic. Today's music trends are forced.
Aside from some EDM style folks, such as ZHU - great music but hes not out there trying to push 'lifestyle' bs, as much as others.
- bigbillheck 3y ago> Their influence was organic. Today's music trends are forced. This is 100% purestrain revisionism.
- samstave 3y agoUh, I had to goog this... but this doesnt map. So explain thyself ;; " this involve a significant revision of fundamental Marxist theories and premises, and usually involve making an alliance with the bourgeois class " - uh... explain me... to me?
- bigbillheck 3y agoYour understanding of the music industry of the 60s and 70s is at the 'not even wrong' level. Let's start with this to set the context: > But we dont have revolutionary music such as led zepplin, pink floyd, etc in the current crop. And then when it comes to Led Zeppelin and this: > none of the above sought facade public images as much as every single 'influencing' pop-stars today. I'm not sure what 'facade' is doing there, maybe you meant to use a different word, but I'm also not sure how you can look at Led Zeppelin after the early 70s and say they weren't seeking a public image. Then there's Pink Floyd and this: > Their influence was organic. Today's music trends are forced. From which I'm going to guess that you've never actually listened to the lyrics to 'Have a Cigar'.
- samstave 3y agoim open to hearing ypour thoughts