New theory ... 70s filtered

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

I was looking at Nairn's Big List below and I suddenly thought,
"why all the 80s pop crud", coupled with "where's all the 70s pop crud".

Then I realized that history seems to have succesfully filtered the 70s. When we talk about them, people know what was worth preserving (from heavy rock, to Abba, to Bowie, to the Carpenters to Reggae to Disco to Krautrock to prog to punk etc.)

For the 80s, we don't know. We're still name checking pop acts because they were famous and we liked them (OMD? A-ha?) in a way we'd never do with the 70s equivalents (Slade, Bay City Rollers?)

Anyone agree / disagree?

― phil jones (interstar), Tuesday, 7 January 2003 10:06 (twenty-two years ago)

We're still too close to the decade, maybe?

― Nick Southall (Nick Southall), Tuesday, 7 January 2003 10:23 (twenty-two years ago)

i dont think OMD and A-Ha are the 80s equivalent of Slade and Bay City Rollers tho...they just FEEL cooler to me as well - wouldnt you say the former were considerably more sophisto-pop than the latter? Slade were gonzo glam, BCR were pure teen pop pap for the time albeit with instruments...i think OMD at least attracted an older fanbase didnt they? A-Ha's audience was actually more 'universal', especially when you look at the real tweenage idols of the time like Bros

― stevem (blueski), Tuesday, 7 January 2003 10:37 (twenty-two years ago)

The 80s equivalent of Slade and the Bay City Rollers was Madness, surely?

― Matt DC (Matt DC), Tuesday, 7 January 2003 10:56 (twenty-two years ago)

Then I realized that history seems to have succesfully filtered the 70s. When we talk about them, people know what was worth preserving.

This sentance troubles me for so many reasons...

― Matt DC (Matt DC), Tuesday, 7 January 2003 10:57 (twenty-two years ago)

Sorry, but this whole concept is ludicrous. Who is this 'we'? As long as something's on record it already IS 'preserved', whatever that means. All it takes is one reasonably prominent person to say 'Muhammad Ali vs. Tooth Decay is the best rec of the 70s' and the endless re-evaluations start to the entertainment and enlightenment of everybody. 'History' only filters the past in the mind of the historicizer!

― dave q, Tuesday, 7 January 2003 11:11 (twenty-two years ago)

But then, I still think Megadeth's "Peace Sells But Who's Buying?" will be vindicated as a great pop track. HM flatulence kept to a minimum (not that I care but we're talkin' 'pop' here) and the lyrics seem better now than they did then. As crossovers go I like it better than "Jump"

― dave q, Tuesday, 7 January 2003 11:14 (twenty-two years ago)

also why all the snideness abt slade? they're hardly a negligeable proposition

― mark s (mark s), Tuesday, 7 January 2003 11:17 (twenty-two years ago)

also why all the snideness abt slade? they're hardly a negligeable proposition: if you've filtered them out of yr 70s, then yr 70s is very shrivelled indeed

― mark s (mark s), Tuesday, 7 January 2003 11:18 (twenty-two years ago)

I argued something similar to phil on Custos's 70s most under/overrated LPs thread from a year or so ago. I think there has been an attempt by cultural observers and critics to set in stone what the 70s were about. And yes, that includes Slade.

But the process dave q mentions has challenged this very effectively already - reissues that have been popping up in the last couple of years are pointing up (almost) an alternative canon that could have been. I'm thinking particularly of the soul, funk and reggae stuff that's been recovered from archive hell, but that's just what I've been buying/hearing. I'm sure there's more than just this which I haven't got to yet.

Extrapolating from this, maybe it's this same reissue programme and the current trend for reviving everything from pop's past (as Tom said recently, everything's 'retro' nowadays so nothing is) that has prevented the 80s from being cast in stone in the same way?

― Jeff W, Tuesday, 7 January 2003 11:25 (twenty-two years ago)

Enormously recommended - Disky's WOW THAT WAS THE 70s box set.

― Tom (Groke), Tuesday, 7 January 2003 12:48 (twenty-two years ago)

dave q : of course, the idea of filtering implies a canon. And of course canons are always subject to revision.

But still, I think there's an implicit canon in our discussions (which are of course also part of the revision process) and *that's* what I'm refering to. As far as the implicit ILM discussion canon is concerned, we've filtered out far more of the pop crud of the 70s than we have of the 80s.

Is this because the pop crud of the 80s is just better?

Is it because the majority of ILM are of an age to remember the pop crud of the 80s but most here are too young to remember being into the pop crud of the 70s?

Is there another reason?

― phil jones (interstar), Tuesday, 7 January 2003 13:09 (twenty-two years ago)

we just spent the last week discussing early 70s prog in considerable detail, phil, and the fact that you think slade is somehow downgraded/excluded here compared to OMD makes me think the filter is happening more in your choice of threads to deem typical than in any ilm "choice of canon"

(example of 80s chartmusic hardly ever discussed here: the kind of plasticky soul music heing made by kashif, mid-period evelyn king, the emotions, etc...)

― mark s (mark s), Tuesday, 7 January 2003 13:22 (twenty-two years ago)

I think it's the second reason phil. Most ILM people are in their mid to late 20s, and that means they remember 80s pop best. I think there's also a possible case for saying that the charts in, say, 1982 were just better than charts in the 70s, but I'm not the person to make it. (Marcello to thread?)

― Tom (Groke), Tuesday, 7 January 2003 13:23 (twenty-two years ago)

70s chart-stuff that really hasn't been discussed or considered much: sailor, showaddywaddy, barron knights

― mark s (mark s), Tuesday, 7 January 2003 13:26 (twenty-two years ago)

actually madness hardly ever get discussed here!?

― mark s (mark s), Tuesday, 7 January 2003 13:37 (twenty-two years ago)

mark s : OK, look, sorry. I have nothing particular against Slade ... except, you know, we've just had christmas etc ...

let's replace them with Showaddywaddy in further discussion ...

― phil jones (interstar), Tuesday, 7 January 2003 13:43 (twenty-two years ago)

Well, I guess its because those of us who grew up in the 80s don't have enough emotional distance from the 80s to comment rationally upon it.

― Lord Custos Omega (Lord Custos Omega), Tuesday, 7 January 2003 13:47 (twenty-two years ago)

I was going to say exactly that, mark. There's loads of great chart pop that has been written out of history : Fox - s-s-s-single bed, Marshall-Hain - Dancing in The City, Bubbleglam - Racey, Mud.

Philly Soul never gets talked about either.

I think the charts in 1977/8/9 were as good as 1982, possibly 1972 also. Of course Tom is OTM about the age thing.

― Dr. C (Dr. C), Tuesday, 7 January 2003 13:48 (twenty-two years ago)

"S-s-s-single bed" is titanic!

― Tom (Groke), Tuesday, 7 January 2003 13:52 (twenty-two years ago)

yes sorry phil, i wz kind of reacting against yr specific choice of "pop crud" — and also probably the implications of that term, which i don't really like — rather than the abstract idea of differing levels of filter for difft eras.

Possibly worth recalling that pop culture at the close of the 70s included a World-Historical Purge/Transformation/Upside-Downification of All Social Value HaHa, which stands like a sneering ghost at the shoulder of all, but affects music after it (where those who pay it mind pre-select in nervous advance of the NEXT purge) in a difft way to music before it (which either got purged — prog, flimsy adult pop — or didn't — glam, bubblegum, teenybopper pop — so that if you want to reinstate stuff you're fighting a concrete judgement of someone else's rather than a potential judgment basically second-guessed by yrself.... )

― mark s (mark s), Tuesday, 7 January 2003 14:03 (twenty-two years ago)

Maybe it's also cuz 70s pop metal spawned 80s hair metal which, not to get into another Ratt vs. Ramones fite, might not be what -- I'll just talk for me for once -- I want on the front of my brain. But I heart Slade and Bay City Rollers (and I'll add Sweet and heck why not Queen) just as much as OMD and A-Ha... The best part about all those bands being not-in-vogue in a retro sort of way at the moment is picking up the albums for $3 a piece. But keep...it...a...secret.

― Aaron W, Tuesday, 7 January 2003 14:28 (twenty-two years ago)

No. of mentions of Barron Knights on ILM since its inception (other than on this thread) = 7

Showaddywaddy have 1 thread (13 replies) plus 15 other mentions, mostly by one "Terry Shannon" (guess who?)

― Jeff W, Tuesday, 7 January 2003 14:34 (twenty-two years ago)

Sailor = 6 (and only one of these by mark!)

― Jeff W, Tuesday, 7 January 2003 14:42 (twenty-two years ago)

Sailor! Sailor! Sailor!

Best Single : either Glass of Champagne or Traffic Jam.

Remember the wierd push me-pull you double keybd thingy they used?

― Dr. C (Dr. C), Tuesday, 7 January 2003 15:07 (twenty-two years ago)

yeah it had a special name, didn't it?

*looks it up in v.battered nme book of rock*

THE NICKELODEON!!

― mark s (mark s), Tuesday, 7 January 2003 15:09 (twenty-two years ago)

May I filter out OMD and A-ha and keep Slade and the Bay City Rollers please?

― Sean (Sean), Tuesday, 7 January 2003 15:55 (twenty-two years ago)

Seventies filters?

http://www.chipcenter.com/eexpert/images/bmcginty/bmcginty037fig1.jpg

― Christine "Green Leafy Dragon" Indigo (cindigo), Wednesday, 8 January 2003 00:57 (twenty-two years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.