Is rock dead?
Lately Gene Simmons has been on a foot-in-mouth hot streak with his ill-spoken words on depression and suicide, so when I heard some vague rumbling tweets about a new transgression, I ignored it because that’s what Gene Simmons does and ignoring him is what I do [at least as much as someone who has read two original Kiss member autobiographies out of the four (and it’s only a matter of time before he gets to the two others) can].
But as I was sitting here trying to think about what to write about tonight, I saw a link referring to the controversial statement and saw that it was about a short Esquire interview written by his son, Nick, in which he makes the classic old-man lament that the music he loves is “finally dead”.
And while there’s definitely a hint of “Get off my lawn” in the section where he defies his son to name a great rock band post 1984 (to which Nick correctly names Nirvana, causing his dad to respond back with a well, yeah, of course Nirvana), it’s a bit harder for me to dismiss his complaint when he refers to how the access of free music on the Internet has negatively affected the development of bands who were once nurtured (some would say exploited) by record labels as they made their way to greatness. Asked what advice he’d give to young musicians, Gene says simply, “Don’t quit your day job….”
And because Gene is Gene, people are happy to dismiss his unhappy grumblings, but his cynicism can apparently be found in a much different place.
I say this, because a friend of mine told me about a Q&A he had attended featuring a series of accomplished writers, artists and musicians–including a man who could probably be considered Simmons antithesis, REM front man Michael Stipe. Asked the same question, he gave almost the same response (in message if not actual words).
Now some may read this as the bitterness of fading legends lamenting their inability to remain relevant in a constantly evolving musical landscape, but I do think our current sense of entitlement regarding creative media is definitely one that should have us concerned. The question no one seems to want to answer is how we keep creating art in a world where no one wants to pay artists or put up with anything that gets in the way of our immediate gratification? “They just have to find new ways to monetize their work!” is the cry, which is like excusing a dine & dash by saying the restaurant needs to find a new way to make money other than selling food.
The other popular line is, “I’ll start paying for it when it’s worth paying for!” which is just hilarious bullshit, because we all know it isn’t true. And if none of it is worth paying for, why are you reading/watching/listening to it in the first place? Is your time so worthless that you’re willing to waste it on shit just because it’s free? Or is that nothing seems worth paying for when you have the option to get it for nothing? Without that investment it’s hard not to feel a certain amount of contempt–it’s much easier to turn off a free movie the second it displeases us than it is to do the same for one we paid for, even though that displeasure might be reversed within the span of just a few minutes.
As a whole, society has always been slightly suspicious of artists–regarding them as the necessary weirdos the world needs to give us beauty and get through the more boring parts of existence. In the past, they lived or died on the whims of wealthy patrons, which meant a whole lot of portraits of rich people and depictions requested by the church. The skill of the masters was such that their work transcended these limitations, but imagine what they could have done without worrying about having to pay the rent. Simmons asks what music would have been like if The Beatles never got the label support that turned them from the One Direction of their day into the creators of some of the most universally transcendent music of their era.
And I think he has a point.
So, rock (an admittedly nebulous term whose classification changes from person to person) probably isn’t dead, because the rock that does exists isn’t going anywhere and somehow new stuff will find a way–like a blade of grass cracking through a big city sidewalk. But it’s not healthy, because our attitudes about the importance of art in our lives as a whole are not healthy. We clearly still want it, but we don’t seem to have much respect for it and maybe it will take us losing it to finally appreciate how important it is to us.
This is simply the result of everyone on average having a much lower disposable income than they used to.
The current economic system is a disaster, a big scam (take your pick, probably both) that makes most of us slaves to debt and saving, very little money to spend on entertainment, and nobody has the time or money to make music complaining about it either, it seems.
I completely disagree with Gene Simmons and you on this. Corporate—that is, label-curated—rock may well not be long for this world, that I will agree on. Though the assertion that the only great new band since 1984 is Nirvana is silly: U2, Muse, REM, The White Stripes & Jack White in general, The Black Keys, Beck, Rage Against the Machine… But I digress. Rock music will never die, nor will any other genre of music, for one simple reason: artists make art because they love making art. There will probably be fewer acts around, as is the case now with… Read more »