---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
From: Matt Hellige <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>It makes a difference because we're talking about the possibility
of
>new people getting into techno, and one wonders whether this is a
fad
>or a long-term trend. If 500 people went to see Surgeon last time
he
>was in town, and 10000 go next time, one wants to know whether
this
>will last (the way rock and roll suddenly got popular and STAYED
THAT
>WAY) or whether attendance will be back down to 500 or worse next
>year.
>
>So I think it does matter what percentage of new folks at a
techno gig
>are likely to develop an abiding interest in techno. I'm not
willing
>to commit to demographic distinctions or hairstyle criticism or
>whatever, but I do think the difference between fad and trend is
real,
>and relevant.
maybe i misphrased things, or perhaps my use of the word "hipster"
set people off, bugt this is exactly what i was trying to point
out. a real renaissance is based on people committed to an
artform, not just trend hoppers who wont have anything to do with
this in 2 years. i have no qualms with people newly into this
music. it would make no sense if i did, i only got into it in 98
and have been playing it out as the majority of my deejaying for
under 2 years.
>One more note, to forestall possible flaming... I'm absolutely NOT
>willing to engage in distinctions between musical enjoyment, like
>"hipsters don't REALLY LIKE techno" or "since you've only been
going
>to techno shows for a month, you don't REALLY GET IT" or "since
you
>won't be here in a year or so, you can't ACTUALLY be enjoying the
>music".
>
>Epistemologically, it's pretty dubious, and it really makes no
>difference anyway. I'm just interested in actually attendance
>trends...
this also was not my point. i just think that for the most part
its obvious that when trends blow up they dont retain even a large
portion of people who got into it. i made no value judgements on
the music or the people who listened to it, just an observation
that when things like this happen, they dont last forever. if you
judge a music scene's health on trends that revolve around its
core, youre missing the point i think. the core is what really
makes things last. new blood is always good and its also necessary
for making music last, but look at scenes based on music that is
ever changing like drum and bass: things tend to get ridiculous at
some point if theres no contant reference.
---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
From: "Pete Grammenos" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Miss kitten made a fan out of me, nothing electoclash about her
set when she
>played here in nyc w/ mayer a few weeks ago. she played some hard
as nails
>techno and i would even go as far as to say that she played more
diverse and
>interesting than mayer.
again, i didnt make any comment on anything miss kitten has done.
if anything she was doing the electroclash thing long before it
was a hipster fad so even if she still did just that, it wouldnt
make a difference. all im saying is that the majority of people
would have no clue who she was without the hipster blow up of
electroclash.
>As for the hipsters, it's nice to have new people coming out to
experience
>techno, fad or not, i'm sure there will be a few who will become
long term
>fans
>after experiencing a good night of techno. Some of these supposed
*hipsters*
>were out till the end, dancing, having a grand old time, isn't
that what
>it's all about?
what would really excite me is if new people were just
consistantly getting into the music without there being a trend
associated with it. thats all. i loved seeing all kinds of people
getting down to techno and house in detroit not because someone or
some magaine told them it was cool but because they heard the
music and it moved them.
tom
________________________________________________________________
andythepooh.com
