NIHILISM: ROCK’S BIGGEST CLICHÉ
Entertainment critics and people prone to intellectual snobbery are very quick to complain about rock music when it becomes clichéd. However, they seem to miss the biggest cliché in that culture: nihilism. Many, in fact, refuse to believe that rock can exist without a self-destructive mentality of “live fast, love hard, and die young.” Personally, I can’t think of anything more trite and predictable in modern popular music.
How many of us associate rock with self-destructive bad boys who constantly tempt death with self-indulgent behavior? How much of rock iconography consists of symbols of death, such as skulls, demons, and grim reapers? For that matter, consider just how many rock heroes brought about their own demise either through substance abuse, suicide, or gross personal irresponsibility. The list is very long; Hank Williams, Brian Jones, Jimi Hendrix, Janis Joplin, Jim Morrison, Elvis Presley, Keith Moon, Sid Vicious, Kurt Cobain, etc., and it only keeps growing.
Being a self-appointed "Trash Culture Connoisseur,” I am all about defending an adult's right to enjoy rock culture without being regarded as immature or empty-headed by the vanilla masses. However, I have never been particularly fond of rock’s obsession with self-destruction. Even as a teen, I was more impressed with artists whose rebellion was more subtle and intellectual: Bob Dylan or Bruce Springsteen, for example. For me, rock (and rock 'n' roll) is about celebrating youth, life, love, and standing up for needed social change--civil rights, feeding the needy, ending war, and uniting the divided.
Then again, consider that I am a lifelong Beatles fan. Even though they were far from saints, they were never about tempting death nor behaving like badass tough guys. Sadly, this has made many rock fans (especially those whose tastes begin with post-psychedelia) regard The Fabs as "wussy" or "wimp rock." This is hardly the case, especially considering that the early Silver Beatles played months of 8 hour sessions in sleazy and violent Hamburg nightclubs that would frighten even the most macho among us.
Granted, I love the musical output of the likes of The Rolling Stones, The Doors, Iggy Pop, The Sex Pistols, and Nirvana, but have never been compelled to emulate their public nihilism. As Dee Dee Ramone once wrote (ironically, as time has proven), "I wanna live...I wanna live my life..." So do I. So do many of us.
In reality, nihilism has become a classic rock cliché for one reason: it sells. Ever since a generation who liked and understood rock ‘n’ roll took over the business reins in the late ‘sixties, the model of the fast-living badass has been remade and remodeled numerous times for each successive rock generation. The ‘seventies gave us Led Zeppelin. The ‘eighties gave us Guns ‘N’ Roses. Nirvana and Marilyn Manson represented the ‘nineties. Now, it seems that almost every rock newcomer, be it pop, metal, or alternative, is sold as a pierced and tattooed love boy determined to outrage and shock every teenagers’ parents.
This formula works, and it does not take a psychology major to understand why. The idea of a menacing-but-sexy singer appeals to an adolescent’s growing sense of independence as well as their libido. Nothing better expresses one's own identity than emulating a pop idol who alternately annoys and intimidates one’s parents. There’s only one problem with this model—today’s parents are young enough to have been part of an earlier rock generation who did the same thing to their parental units. Sadly, time and changing social status often blinds adults to their own youthful rebellion and how, at the core, it is exactly the same as their children's.
If anything, this commercialized nihilism has actually stunted creativity. In the late seventies, a certain contingent of post-punk musicians realized this and started rejecting wanton self-indulgence. Many, such as Squeeze, Marshall Crenshaw, and Rockpile, were critically acclaimed for their fresh approach and originality. They were characterized by a more subtle and cerebral sound with a down-to-earth and "ordinary" image. Sadly, most were commercial failures with the mainstream pop audience and never really expanded their fan base beyond intellectual college students and public radio listeners. This is probably because rock fans had been programmed to accept “bad asses” much more readily than “nice guys.” Major labels gave up on promoting this type of artist and turned to a much more lucrative and proven cash cow, the hard-living bad boy. The music industry will continue to milk this formula—and recycle ‘seventies-styled hard rock—until the public tires of it. I do not see this happening any time soon.
If young people ever hope to make any lasting social change, it will be when they finally reject nihilistic idols in favor of a smarter and more positive model. Emulating destructive and indulgent behavior will only sap their abilities to take action and change their little corners of the world. Going in with a clear-headed determination will only help them attempt to improve our world by running for public office, volunteering for political campaigns, doing environmental and social work, composing and performing music that inspires others, and even writing columns that few people actually read!
Time has proven that hard living takes it's toll on the mind and body, and that is exactly what turns one into the feeble fool who lives up to the negative rock stereotypes of the beige mainstream. We are much smarter than that! We need not sell ourselves short any more.
Special thanks to Randall Hugh Crawford of Grand Rapids, Michigan for inspiring me to write on this topic.
How many of us associate rock with self-destructive bad boys who constantly tempt death with self-indulgent behavior? How much of rock iconography consists of symbols of death, such as skulls, demons, and grim reapers? For that matter, consider just how many rock heroes brought about their own demise either through substance abuse, suicide, or gross personal irresponsibility. The list is very long; Hank Williams, Brian Jones, Jimi Hendrix, Janis Joplin, Jim Morrison, Elvis Presley, Keith Moon, Sid Vicious, Kurt Cobain, etc., and it only keeps growing.
Being a self-appointed "Trash Culture Connoisseur,” I am all about defending an adult's right to enjoy rock culture without being regarded as immature or empty-headed by the vanilla masses. However, I have never been particularly fond of rock’s obsession with self-destruction. Even as a teen, I was more impressed with artists whose rebellion was more subtle and intellectual: Bob Dylan or Bruce Springsteen, for example. For me, rock (and rock 'n' roll) is about celebrating youth, life, love, and standing up for needed social change--civil rights, feeding the needy, ending war, and uniting the divided.
Then again, consider that I am a lifelong Beatles fan. Even though they were far from saints, they were never about tempting death nor behaving like badass tough guys. Sadly, this has made many rock fans (especially those whose tastes begin with post-psychedelia) regard The Fabs as "wussy" or "wimp rock." This is hardly the case, especially considering that the early Silver Beatles played months of 8 hour sessions in sleazy and violent Hamburg nightclubs that would frighten even the most macho among us.
Granted, I love the musical output of the likes of The Rolling Stones, The Doors, Iggy Pop, The Sex Pistols, and Nirvana, but have never been compelled to emulate their public nihilism. As Dee Dee Ramone once wrote (ironically, as time has proven), "I wanna live...I wanna live my life..." So do I. So do many of us.
In reality, nihilism has become a classic rock cliché for one reason: it sells. Ever since a generation who liked and understood rock ‘n’ roll took over the business reins in the late ‘sixties, the model of the fast-living badass has been remade and remodeled numerous times for each successive rock generation. The ‘seventies gave us Led Zeppelin. The ‘eighties gave us Guns ‘N’ Roses. Nirvana and Marilyn Manson represented the ‘nineties. Now, it seems that almost every rock newcomer, be it pop, metal, or alternative, is sold as a pierced and tattooed love boy determined to outrage and shock every teenagers’ parents.
This formula works, and it does not take a psychology major to understand why. The idea of a menacing-but-sexy singer appeals to an adolescent’s growing sense of independence as well as their libido. Nothing better expresses one's own identity than emulating a pop idol who alternately annoys and intimidates one’s parents. There’s only one problem with this model—today’s parents are young enough to have been part of an earlier rock generation who did the same thing to their parental units. Sadly, time and changing social status often blinds adults to their own youthful rebellion and how, at the core, it is exactly the same as their children's.
If anything, this commercialized nihilism has actually stunted creativity. In the late seventies, a certain contingent of post-punk musicians realized this and started rejecting wanton self-indulgence. Many, such as Squeeze, Marshall Crenshaw, and Rockpile, were critically acclaimed for their fresh approach and originality. They were characterized by a more subtle and cerebral sound with a down-to-earth and "ordinary" image. Sadly, most were commercial failures with the mainstream pop audience and never really expanded their fan base beyond intellectual college students and public radio listeners. This is probably because rock fans had been programmed to accept “bad asses” much more readily than “nice guys.” Major labels gave up on promoting this type of artist and turned to a much more lucrative and proven cash cow, the hard-living bad boy. The music industry will continue to milk this formula—and recycle ‘seventies-styled hard rock—until the public tires of it. I do not see this happening any time soon.
If young people ever hope to make any lasting social change, it will be when they finally reject nihilistic idols in favor of a smarter and more positive model. Emulating destructive and indulgent behavior will only sap their abilities to take action and change their little corners of the world. Going in with a clear-headed determination will only help them attempt to improve our world by running for public office, volunteering for political campaigns, doing environmental and social work, composing and performing music that inspires others, and even writing columns that few people actually read!
Time has proven that hard living takes it's toll on the mind and body, and that is exactly what turns one into the feeble fool who lives up to the negative rock stereotypes of the beige mainstream. We are much smarter than that! We need not sell ourselves short any more.
Special thanks to Randall Hugh Crawford of Grand Rapids, Michigan for inspiring me to write on this topic.
posted by Trash Culture Connoisseur at 11:52 AM
1 comments
