Rock still dangerous, scary and evil?

musicismylife78

Seems like rock music has always been tied to the devil and scaring people. From Robert Johnson's infamous deal, to the Stones Sympathy for the Devil, to how parents react to alot of the music, to marilyn manson etc...

But as far as I can tell, it doesnt seem like music or rock music specificially is scary to people anymore. In many ways its what teens, rebellious individuals are SUPPOSED to listen to and be interested in. Its a given.

The Onion awhile back had a great article about how Marilyn manson felt left out because he wasnt scaring people anymore, his antics werent outrageous to anyone anymore. In many ways, as usual the parody of the onion is right on.

I cant think of many rock bands nowadays who like Led Zep or Sabbath, or Manson, who flirted with the devil and tried to scare america's parents.

Are we all so jaded and cynical now, that rock music doesnt scare us anymore? The way our grandparents reacted when our parents started listening to The Doors or The Beatles or Elvis. Even heavy metal nowadays isnt tied into the devil and evil and scariness anymore.

What happened?

Yellow Ledbelly

Rap took the scariness of music to whole new level and the metalheads just couldn't keep up

Kann

Yellow Ledbelly wrote:

Rap took the scariness of music to whole new level and the metalheads just couldn't keep up

That's a bit over the top to generalize to everyone but between some rappers being shot dead, some pop stars ending drunk and naked photos on internet, all the shitty shock reality tv etc. it may be true that metalheads were outbetted.

Brain Of E

Yea, no wants to scare any one anyways. Most new bands/artists want to be able to market themselves to the widest audience as possible.

Yellow Ledbelly

Brain Of E wrote:

Yea, no wants to scare any one anyways. Most new bands/artists want to be able to market themselves to the widest audience as possible.

I do believe rap did become the three-headed devil for a lot of religious and mommy groups therefore lessening the emphasis put on metal.....which makes sense because rap is far and away more popular in suburbia.

E's point also carries some weight. It's a lot easier to sell a shiny red apple than a brown with worm holes

Gonzo1977

Rock'n'Roll's more like a 70's horror flick these days. More often than not...the techniques and gimmics it uses to try and scare people only end up making it look more like a ridiculous comedy than a scary movie.

Gimmic bands like GWAR and Manson will always piss off right wing christian soft brains and Tipper Gore alike who think that by listening to heavy metal that their kids will all of a sudden drop out of school, burn their bibles, and commit mass suicide.

But the above only serves to piss people off rather then scare them.

Besides...Alice Cooper and Kiss covered that ground a long long time ago.

Unless you're going to go the Swedish Black Metal route and burn down churches, or set yourself on fire (for real) on stage...there really isn't much a new Rock'n'Roll band can do to scare the shit out of people anymore.

TV and Video Games have basically desensitized North American Culture and made them pretty much immune to any sensationalism and spectical that Rock'n'Roll could possibly create.

Christ!! Iggy Pop probably wouldn't even get banned anymore for whipping out his hammer on stage.

The world has changed alot since Elvis's shaking hips.

PearlJamaholic

the times have changed is all. once upon a time wanting to play guitar made you a rebel that would drop out of school and do drugs, now emo kids play guitar and are viewed as sensitive. the whole image has changed so everything after it has to change also.

and i think another issue was that rock would corrupt kids, but thats been disproven and we cant go back to that. how many kids grew up listening to zeppelin and never worshipped satan? so now anyone that says (insert band) will be the down fall of the kids generation will be laughed at. what the band does on or off stage in no way seriously effects children.

i grew up listening to nirvana and aic, yet i never did heroin. i think everyone knows, its just music and it touches emotions, but it rarely forces actions. if that was the case millions of cops would be dead based on the number of ratm albums sold.

FinsburyParkCarrots

Rock became assimilated into the establishment: the drug-addled hedonism and daft satan-worshipping excesses of indulged rockers was really no more excessive than that of, say, the British landed gentry and aristocracy. The media had fun portraying this as challenging the sexual and social mores of a generation, but really it wasn't that dangerous to society. Rockers getting political has always been more bothersome to the status quo, although half the time, it's clear these musicians are plastic revolutionaries: stoned millionaire bandwagon jumpers. By the time of Live Aid, the rocker with a conscience, the oxymoronic coked up champagne charlie who sang about freedom in the oppressed world, had lost the edgy fear factor of, say, an early seventies Lennon (an illegal alien in New York, himself allegedly shot in 1980 by a lone nut who saw him as a hypocrite).

MTV had a role to play in taking rock from the underground to the mainstream, and cutting its goolies off in the process.




If you like conspiracy theories about who sees rock as dangerous and why, you could go here:

http://www.jfkmontreal.com/john_lennon/lennon_report.htm

Cropduster84

Nothing's shocking anymore.....

Gardenparty

The internet is the biggest culprit. Not because it is a bad resource but because the mystery is gone. I remember having to get my Pearl jam tour news by calling the 10club hotline phone number or seeing it in a magazine or on the news. That was exciting.

Example: I used to think alice cooper and Manson were antichrists. Now i know that they're both pansies

Gonzo1977

Rock'n'Roll ceased to be scary when I saw Alice Cooper on the golf course.

Django

Check out the documentary GG Allin and the murder junkies: Hated

If rock n'roll is about nihilism and not giving a shit about the rules, then for me GG Allin has got to be the essence of rock n'roll.

All other "rock n'roll" bands Led Zep, the stones, U2 look like a bunch of careerist posers next to this guy. He clearly wasn't worried about selling records or doing deals with corporations or anything sensible like that. He's all about being in the moment.

It's just a shame his music was shit.

Gardenparty

It is also possible that maybe we've just grown up. I don't really know how a 10-16 year old views music. I'm sure they believe some bands are pretty dangerous and buy into the associated hype (those Avenged Sevenfold flamers come to mind)

FinsburyParkCarrots

Django wrote:

Check out the documentary GG Allin and the murder junkies: Hated

If rock n'roll is about nihilism and not giving a shit about the rules, then for me GG Allin has got to be the essence of rock n'roll.

All other "rock n'roll" bands Led Zep, the stones, U2 look like a bunch of careerist posers next to this guy. He clearly wasn't worried about selling records or doing deals with corporations or anything sensible like that. He's all about being in the moment.

It's just a shame his music was shit.

I have to disagree with you about GG Allin. There was nothing really dangerous about him, because there was nothing remotely glamorous about his bizarre kind of self-loathing hedonism. There was nothing scary about him as a rock figurehead, because he was too extreme in his onstage vices to be influential. (He was scary enough in his private life, though.) There was a band called The Flies back in the sixties, whose lead singer used to piss to the audience, so that had been done. There was nothing really evil about him either, as he was more pathetic than anything else. He seemed too fucked up even to be rock and roll. He was a sad and sorry case.

Vedderlution_Baby

What about Norwegian metal bands? They still holding it down?

Django

FinsburyParkCarrots wrote:

I have to disagree with you about GG Allin. There was nothing really dangerous about him, because there was nothing remotely glamorous about his bizarre kind of self-loathing hedonism. There was nothing scary about him as a rock figurehead, because he was too extreme in his onstage vices to be influential. (He was scary enough in his private life, though.) There was a band called The Flies back in the sixties, whose lead singer used to piss to the audience, so that had been done. There was nothing really evil about him either, as he was more pathetic than anything else. He seemed too fucked up even to be rock and roll. He was a sad and sorry case.

Okay, name a more "dangerous" example of a rock n' roll performer than Mr. Allin

Gardenparty

Django wrote:

Okay, name a more "dangerous" example of a rock n' roll performer than Mr. Allin

These guys are still around. Some of them atleast:)


Mayhem

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mayhem_(band)

FinsburyParkCarrots

Django wrote:

Okay, name a more "dangerous" example of a rock n' roll performer than Mr. Allin

John Lennon.

searchlightsoul

Gonzo1977 wrote:

Rock'n'Roll ceased to be scary when I saw Alice Cooper on the golf course.

or when he accepted god into his heart.

Nevermind

FinsburyParkCarrots wrote:

Rock became assimilated into the establishment: the drug-addled hedonism and daft satan-worshipping excesses of indulged rockers was really no more excessive than that of, say, the British landed gentry and aristocracy. The media had fun portraying this as challenging the sexual and social mores of a generation, but really it wasn't that dangerous to society. Rockers getting political has always been more bothersome to the status quo, although half the time, it's clear these musicians are plastic revolutionaries: stoned millionaire bandwagon jumpers. By the time of Live Aid, the rocker with a conscience, the oxymoronic coked up champagne charlie who sang about freedom in the oppressed world, had lost the edgy fear factor of, say, an early seventies Lennon (an illegal alien in New York, himself allegedly shot in 1980 by a lone nut who saw him as a hypocrite).

MTV had a role to play in taking rock from the underground to the mainstream, and cutting its goolies off in the process.




If you like conspiracy theories about who sees rock as dangerous and why, you could go here:

http://www.jfkmontreal.com/john_lennon/lennon_report.htm

Check out what ODB has to say. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gfbyeqxywU&feature=related.

Jack_C_Gregory

There are still dangerous bands that are performing like the Black Metal Scandinavian bands that vocally support the burning of churches, and while some people listen to that kind of music, it doesn't even make a blip on the radar here because it's not on the pop charts or on Mtv. These kinds of bands have existed for some time but go unnoticed because they don't sell enough albums for major parent groups to be concerned. I'm positive if a band like Gorgoroth was burning up the charts in the U.S. and was on a tour of the states, there would be protest like you have never seen by parents groups. Parent groups in the U.S. tend to only protest when something is popular. Marylin Manson went virtually unnoticed with Portrait of an American Family and Smells Like Children, but then Anti-Christ Superstar took off on the Billboard charts and that's when the parent groups came out. Their publicity is only as good as whatever it is they are protesting.