how much longer must we tolerate mass culture

So, I watched the Disney plus version of the Sex Pistols story on Hulu. Wait, that’s not entirely true- I saw “Pistol” the Disney financed Danny Boyle version of Steve Jones’ book “Lonely Boy”. It was OK. I mean, like many bad people with big egos, Jones’ book is just a long excuse for the things he did that he thinks you’d judge him poorly for doing. However, Danny Boyle is a good director, and the cast is at least as good as any you’ll find on TV, and even if the story plays pretty stale, it’s kinder to some of the women than it either could be expected or would have to be. Plus, London, in the mid 1970’s has some lessons for us, in the Trump era. I mean, take the hazy story it tells about Pauline, the semi-mythological character behind the song “Bodies”. The version is much sanitized from Lydon’s version of events, but it does so to make her more sympathetic, and the lesson at the end of it was that Lydon listened to her, and had some empathy for her- an affirmation of some basic humanity, as opposed to Jones’ use of her for his own short-term ends. You see what I mean? Kinder to women, with a story that applies to the here and now. Chrissie Hynde is treated especially well, and almost made into the actual protagonist, even if the real life Hynde doesn’t exactly deserve it. Also, it sets the record a bit straighter on Vivienne Westwood, showing her to be smarter and wittier than most of the blowhards around her. Certainly not “perfect”, but it is a nice foil to the fanning of bonfire egos burning up the scenery. Which brings me to the big message- a major theme is that these are all traumatized, marginalized people who are overjoyed at just being heard- probably the best message one could get from the nihilistic take on Glam Rock that the Sex Pistols sold as “punk”. It also skewers the homophobia rampant throughout rock culture in that effort, so not bad for something coming out around “Pride” month.

No links, this time. Of course, I’m not comfortable with “geek culture” “Fandom” and all the rest of “modern” audience participation. It’s a commercialized fantasy of self importance. Ever since letter writing campaigns to “save” this or that piece of pop media, it’s been a basic misunderstanding of the role of audience member. What you are really doing is a manipulated, nearly scripted version of that jerk yelling “Freebird” at the band on stage. You didn’t learn to “play the instrument”, and you have no idea about the creative work necessary to “put on a show”, but there you are, telling the players who do know the work how to do their job. If they follow your lead they are lost, and if they don’t they risk their income for the output they have already spent. So, yes, it ruins culture, yes, I think this whole enterprise is degrading us, and history will regret this period culturally. This is the era of mob rule, only without any real direction, focus, or power.

So, I see Netflix’s “Stranger Things” top to bottom through that lens. I see that Netflix is based upon a false premise of “On Demand” entertainment- if it was truly based on audience demand, the content would be very different- if the audience really knew what they were demanding, they wouldn’t want entertainment. I see that the Duffer brothers are just a postmodern, bankrupt version of Joss Whedon, who was already a TV Writer version of a Surrealist artist. I see that the cast are easily manipulated children, and “also ran” B-list has beens. ( i.e. the most desperate). Starting to get the point? It wouldn’t be anything more awful than typical huckster trash, except for the addition that the thing is steeped in bereft worship of mid 1980’s Cocaine-addled Stephen King, and the most malignant version of Joss Whedon’s sociopathic egotism. But, hey, I’ve watched Todd Phillips’ and James Gunn’s movies- so, I’m pretty immune to pop culture making us worse human beings, by way of girlboss self affirmations. So, I’d just like to point out one tiny aspect of the poison we’re injecting, here- Stranger Things is putatively about traumatic things, right? The catharsis of art is not in simply depicting trauma, but in positing useful responses to that trauma. Only Stranger Things fails most miserably at this very thing. I mean, take the central character of “11”- she’s both a literal “child called it” abused, and dehumanized trauma survivor, and a Charles Manson-like monster serially killing and destroying as a reward for being that non-human institutional product. That’s your catharsis? Keep in mind- this isn’t subtext- this is explicit. A hero even describes her as a weapon, kin to the Nuclear bomb. This makes Whedon’s “Death is your gift” version of trauma-as-empowerment in Buffy The Vampire Slayer seem like a contestant in the Elie Weisel prize for Ethics. That’s also as good as you are going to get, here- other characters “just get over it” in all kinds of mind altering soul destroying trauma, and the best they can hope for is to die real cool. I’m telling you- you’d be better off watching a revenge exploitation movie from the mid 1970’s. A “Rambo” movie has better ethics. Presented in a yet higher priced Las Vegas showbiz power fantasy said to be an ‘outsider” culture? Yeah, and you wonder why I still call the blog “How Much Longer must we Tolerate Mass Culture”? So, let me affirm again- no link.

Like the title suggests, I’m not considering this anything- I just have some thoughts I wanted to put out into the world, and this seems like the best place. I have been watching an inordinate amount of social media content, and I have to say that it’s making me feel out-of-step, but in a way that seems like maybe I’m flattering myself. For example- I know that being a “content creator” is a job, with demands and deadlines and the like, but it’s still a self selection- like being a celebrity, it’s a combination of personality flaws ( like ego, and singlemindedness) and luck and luxury. This isn’t like being a mill worker where the job is taken because of pure practicality. As such, content creators can be taken to task for putting stuff out there that’s bad, and should be, yet isn’t. Sure, folks get “cancelled” but never for that. They’ll lose the job only if they don’t want it. Even a monster. Like, there are content creators who have sexually abused their ‘fans” but still have the job. They might lose one platform, but there’s always another, and thus the basic job is still there. That doesn’t exist for the audience.

So, I’m wondering how people can engage with this stuff in a protected way? For example- let’s say that some youtuber is basically OK, but one or two of their videos just gives out bad information- a “how to” that misses a key step, a political hot take that mis-states the issue, a tutorial on a product that doesn’t work that way, and so on. Again, The content creator is basically ok, they just made a mistake. The content the mistake will only go away if the creator wants it to go away, so, if, for whatever reason they don’t want it to go away, what can the audience do? In general, how it seems to go is in a binary- people either pledge undying support, and treat the creator as if the mistake never happened, or they abandon the creator entirely, and treat it as if everything is wrong. The more “subjective” the thrust of the content, the less likely actual engagement is to take place.

I know- so it goes with stuff built on a parasocial relationship. But, it seems like a bad relationship. Even if both creator and audience have good intentions. It’s like having a brother who will never get their act together, or a lover who’s got a bunch of hang ups- if the flaw isn’t addressed, the relationship becomes bad for both parties. I mean, I’m still kicking myself for failing to address flaws in relationships that were abandoned 30 years ago- relationships that could have been fulfilling, but now are lost.

But- this is where I’m out of step. I still see “new media” with old ideas and old perceptions. I still see it all as TV and newspapers. I was never a “letter to the editor” type. I never campaigned to keep a show on the air, never wrote an angry letter hoping to insult a columnist- to me, there’s a huge impersonal wall between the media and myself. It’s all product, and I can judge for myself whether to buy it or not. So, since that still applies- just because I like, say, Lindsay Ellis’ take on some Disney movie, that’s ‘stand alone”. If she writes a racist tweet, so what? That doesn’t affect the one video essay I did decide to “buy”. Let’s say that I find a Rob Chapman review of some amp particularly informative. Why should that mean I find anything else he’s ever done worthy? I just needed to know about that amplifier, what does it mean to me whether he supports or exploits Chinese factory workers? It doesn’t mean that I’m apathetic about racism, or labor conditions- that’s just absurd. I just don’t connect and give that much power to another person, based upon the degree of fame. To give you two more examples that are broader- I don’t care about JK Rowling because I haven’t found any of her writing to be of any value to me. That she’s proven to be a racist TERF is unrelated. If I ever interact with her, which I most assuredly won’t, if the topic of race, or Transgender people came up, I will “call out’ that racism, and Transphobia. As it stands, our interaction is just “Do I want a piss poor fantasy novel?”- and no, I don’t. Likewise, Dave Chappelle. I liked enough episodes of the TV show that had his name on it that I’ll watch them, but that’s as far as it goes. Here I can prove myself- I really did meet him, and had an actual interaction with him. Did we talk about anything deep? Nope, and we didn’t even mention comedy- I just said “Hey, mind if I cut through, here? ” that’s literally it. Does that mean I “hate” him? I don’t think so, I just don’t know him, and nothing about his stage work or celebrity had anything to do with the situation we were in. Now, if the topic did come up? Yeah, I think he’s demonstrated that money is his biggest value, and I’ll gladly say that greed is hardly a virtue.

So, is this just a convoluted way of advocating separating art from artist? I don’t think so- I think I view it far more harshly- I think anyone can be a “one hit wonder” and that genius is an event, not a characteristic. Circumstances, talent, and disposition can converge to meet the moment, and something can connect, but most of the time it’s limited to just that thing. Sure, there are some folks who make art that consistently connects with me, but that’s why this isn’t a “review” blog, and I’m not a reviewer- such repeated connections usually mean that I connect with the person, in some way- circumstances align, dispositions are close enough, and so on that I can connect. But, if that’s the case, I’ll talk about it in that way. It’s almost never in a vacuum.

The title? Just because it’s fun to say. Nothing deeper than that. However, I do want to talk about three current releases: Black Swan Lane “Hide In View“, Aeon Station “Observatory” and INVSN “Let the Night Love You”– all three would be really worthy additions to your collection of music, but I should remind you that I do not do reviews, and I’m not engaged in music criticism, so, don’t read that into what I’m talking about to you.

So, stepping back, all three have something similar- a possible misread as nostalgia, retro-ism, throwbacks, and other false marketing notions. You could, if bound to marketing ideas of reductive “identity”, read all of these as ‘referencing” music of the 1980’s. All principle songwriters are over the age of 40, meaning that the 1980’s were within their lifetimes. However, all of these releases are meant as current ( note the pun: both “current” in the time sense, and in the energizing sense). But, I’d say that such tropes are misplaced as they are using under-developed styles- Black Swan Lane are using the “neo British psychedelia” elements that were explored briefly by bands like The Teardrop Explodes, and the Chameleons, Aeon Station is a new permutation of The Wrens, who were part of the “College Rock’ precursor to the “Alternative” market, and INVSN play with notions of the Euro Pop part of the mid 1980’s New Wave. As such, I’d say a better read is that they all aren’t “finished” with those elements- they are dialectically finishing the sentences, both metaphorically, and linguistically. That is- it’s not fully anachronism – yes, there’s some doubling back, but only in the same sense as one doubles back to fill in something incomplete.

However, there’s also a sense of combating such external and artificial senses of “identity”. I don’t want to say that Mark Fisher was anything less than a total genius- but there’s a constant debate with a concept he articulated- that since the rise of Neoliberal ideology in the 1980’s with the Thatcher and Reagan administrations, we are all engaged with a kind of “Hauntology”- a “haunted” ontology with “the end of history” Fukuyama’s insistence that corporate Capitalism, and Western “democracy’ has ended all debate, and this is how we’re going to be, forever. So, Fisher postulates that’s why we’re in this strange place, culturally- all sequels, reboots, retroisms and coded semiotic identities. If the future is all ‘more of the same”, why push forward, even in our imagination? So, the rejoinder here is that these releases are, in fact, pushing forward. If Black Swan Lane are just retreading ground, why aren’t any members of the Chameleons on this release? If they are just circling back on a 1980’s trope, what was the inclusion of actual participants in that “trope” when it was new? I would propose that this is an artificially dull, and reductive notion of the actual identity of Black Swan Lane as an artistic entity- it’s like saying that we, as people are all trying to be 20 years old- and I’m sure you are aware, it’s never that simple. Meanwhile, Aeon Station’s Kevin Whelan has been extremely explicit in what he is doing- he was frustrated by other members of the Wrens in delaying new releases, and so, is just literally going forward with music, under a new name, giving up the marketing capital of the band name and the reductive sales potential of that name- as he puts it, he doesn’t care if only four people hear it, he just feels the need to make music. Then, consider this- INVSN’s Dennis Lyxzen is part of a few other musical entities that could far more easily capitalize on nostalgia-having had two projects that had sales dwarfing that of INVSN. No, the only answer is that he’s doing this for passion towards this music as an entity, in and of itself.

Now, if you are picking up what I’m laying down- you still might not notice the resentment. I am comfortable in the worlds of Ontology, and Socioeconomic theory, but I do resent an intrusion of such considerations into my world of aesthetic appreciation. To put it crudely- I’m most definitely a “fuck politics, let’s dance” kind of guy when it comes to art. However, this is the world we have made. Still, let’s get down to it, and I won’t need too many more words to do this: What’s there in each release? Black Swan Lane traffic in swirling melodies, and moody minor keys. Add a firm beat this time around. Add more assertive strained/shouted vocals. What I’m saying is that it’s a much more vigorous release than the pastoral, vaguely surreal past releases- but vigorous, not abrasive. Lyrically, this is also less introspective, more focused on relations between people. Still just plain beautiful pop, but the atmosphere is more immediate than is usually implied in “atmospheric”- the “heightened senses” part of the psychedelic spectrum, surfaces, and textures are much more present. Aeon Station dials up the gorgeous, if somewhat traditional sense of multi-part harmonies, and dials down the dissonance ( it’s still there, just more likely to be mild “lo fi” tape hiss, than overwhelming shrill feedback) The base melodies are more simple, and perfect pitched, but because they are more piano than guitar, the results are more “airy” than spare. Yes, a little “back to basics”, but in an orchestral sense. Like scaling a concerto from a twenty piece to a quartet, this can be plenty lush, just relying less on tricks of bombast to get to that lushness. A healthy, adjusted DIY basement take on Brian Wilson’s “hymns to God”- only with an adult, not adolescent perspective. INVSN is an emotional response, concerned with rhythm and pulse, to a rebellious nature in a conformist society- it’s about how it feels, not how it is to be an active participant in a world not of your making. As such, while a dry, surface read would be pop new wave, like New Order and Ideal (for non-Germans, probably the biggest name in Neue Deutsche Welle, the same movement that produced Nena and 99 Luftballoons) the feel is more underground- like Suicide, and The Sound, and Fake (mid 80’s Swedish Synth pop band) mashed up, and adjusted for 2022 technology. By the way, I’m not quite sure how I’ve already heard this album, either- for some reason, my pre-order turned into an instant download, so I might be hearing demos, I don’t know.

Finally, just because it fits- I got two of these by way of Tower Records. Yes, for people of my age, Tower Records, the iconic record plantation where you’d comb through the “import” section in the 1990’s, when you couldn’t make it to your favorite independent record store.

Musically, I’ve long had a soft spot for Jay Farrar- that country rock thing of marrying super traditional hillbilly country with late 1980’s/early 1990’s “indie rock”, and the glue to hold ’em together is a distinct “lo fi” recording style? Yeah, that. Lyrically, though, he’s always been a bit too despairing for me. Like Steve Earle or ( former bandmate) Jeff Tweedy minus any fire or hope. So, this makes the new record much more my style. Oh, yeah, it’s still a Jay Farrer joint, and sounds like what would happen if Bob Pollard was more obsessed with Ralph Peer’s OKeh recordings than the Who, but lyrically, it’s closer in spirit to the aforementioned Earle and Tweedy. Maybe the replacement of Chris Frame with Bottle Rockets’ John Horton forced a change in tempo and key that Farrar had to write songs that were engaged with life more? To hear Farrar, himself, he goes back and forth, sometimes citing bullfrogs and cardinals, other times citing Big Star and the Beatles- but I think it was the pandemic. I mean, he’s not a young man against the world, now- he’s been doing this band for 25 years, married, his kids are in college- so, the forced isolation, and uncertainty made him evaluate his alienation. I can relate to that thought, anyway. Johnny Rotten might be inspiring to a 20 year old just getting to the city, but Pete Seeger resonates more to a 55 year old housebound in the suburbs. (even if they both resonate) If you’re feeling the same way, you might want to check it out.

Since the topic was “authority” and since it was full of conceptual puns- thought I’d clarify a few things- “authority” as I used it meant the Hegelian “Master”. “Master” was used in the Japanese ‘Sensei” sense. “Autonomy” is meant in the Kantian sense of first order control matching second order control. I recognize that all these terms have different connotative meanings in standard and colloquial English, so I’m letting you in on the joke, here. I might not have made it past 300 level philosophy, but that’s enough to make some of my jokes pretty obscure.

It’s been awhile, and blogs are passe so I don’t expect a large readership, but this isn’t really for a “readership” anyway, I just have the opportunity and motive to jot some things down, all centering around concepts of “authority” and pop culture artifacts. Those artifacts are- the latest Contrapoints video essay “Envy”, The latest Quicksand LP “Distant Populations”, the latest Fotocrime LP “Heart of Crime” and the latest Naked Raygun LP “Over The Overlords”. I hope that, by the end, if you make it to there, you’ll understand the point I’m trying to make.

So, Contrapoints is a YouTube channel, run by a former disillusioned Philosophy Grad student, turned liberal pundit, Natalie Wynn. I’m certain the main things she wants to get across to you are that she’s a Transgender commentator, but that’s a pose. Oh, her transition is valid, I’m sure, and what she does on Youtube is commentary, but these things are ancillary. Let’s look at what she actually does- 1. Posts 1 or 2 movie-length videos on Youtube per year. 2. 15-20 interviews in media, of various sorts per year. 3. 5 or so written articles per year. 4. a plethora of social media posts, mostly on Twitter, but also Instagram, Reddit, and Facebook. Sounds like a pundit to me. Her earnings through Patreon and speaking fees, and Livestream donations are estimated around the $200K mark annually, which is squarely in the “pundit” class, as well. As for the “liberal” designation, well, what she has taken as her position falls well into what is best described as “mainstream Liberalism” in America- not even as far to the left as say, Bernie Sanders, but ever so slightly to the left of CNN. So, how do these facts play into what I want to say? Well, as a Philosophy student, even a lapsed one, she has to be aware of the logical fallacies she is promoting in this video, and why she is doing so. There are a few obvious ones- the Bandwagon fallacy ( broadly, the “peer pressure” argument) the Strawman fallacy ( she cops to this one) and the Hasty Generalization ( she jumps to conclusions with no more evidence than “right?”) but the biggest one is the appeal to (False) Authority- “So and so says such and such, so it is correct”, without evidence of their authority on the subject, other than their acceptance as “authorities”. In “Envy”, her topic is ostensibly the way that current discontent can be attributed to the vice of envy, and her primary citations are Freud, and Nietzsche. How they are false authorities is pretty obvious, given that all of her examples stem from things outside of their time- either before ( the French Revolution) or more likely, current ( Twitter Mobs, and radical {right and left} online agit-prop) so, that she commits the logical fallacy is a “Philosophy 101” gimme, but the more interesting question is why? Why an appeal to authority, and why these “authorities”? My answers, informed or not, are pertinent to what I’m trying to communicate- I think she is trying to match to her perception of broadly, “the public”, and she chose these thinkers because they are cited often by people she is trying to bring over. That is, very similar to the Neoliberal “Third Way” Democrats and Labour Party, she is catering to the right wing. Having been ‘cancelled” multiple times by the left, and praised for “converting” members of the radical right, I think it’s pretty easy to see how she would try to situate herself in with the Biden, Tony Blair, “Clintonesque” camp. That she knows she is arguing a fallacy ( heck, in earlier videos, she dismissed all of the arguments and citations given here) is immaterial, she is trying to secure a position in what she sees as a secure establishment. Put another way- she’s selling out. But, I wouldn’t point you in the direction of something I see no value in pursuing. The production, and style choices are state-of-the-art. The lighting, alone, rivals Refn. The script is snappy, and paced better than her peers. In all, a very pretty, and tasty poison. So, I’d say the most benefit is to approach it that way- like an excellent Bourbon. Enjoy the flavor, and the sensation, but don’t lose sight that it’s an indulgence, a vice, and a poison.

So, Walter Schreifels already has his secured position. First with Gorilla Biscuits and Youth of Today, he invented a form- Youth Crew Hardcore. Then, his production arranging, and songwriting were at the forefront of the “melodic hardcore” end of the Pop Punk explosion of the early 1990’s- with CIV, Hot Water Music, and Title Fight. So, by the mid 1990’s his band Quicksand can reasonably be called an “authority” in what gets called “Post Hardcore”- an amorphous thing that covers everything from so-called Emo to several genres of Heavy Metal. That tons of bands cite Quicksand, and Schreifels as a key influence leaves no doubt that he has his position secured. So, he could easily just be a producer, and do his little blues rock side project ( He, himself, clearly cedes authority to 1970’s hard rock, so his passions lean towards such “dad like” pursuits) . That leads to the question: why do a Quicksand LP in 2021, when it will have limited sales, and arguably, even smaller authority? He’s already done the triumphant “reunion tour”, and “comeback record”, so, in terms of capitalizing on his position, that’s said and done. That cannot be the motivation, any more. On first listen, “Distant Populations” does have a little scent of that “flogging a dead horse” wringing out the last drops of cash from nostalgia- the production is very 1990’s, ultra compressed. The Label is Epitaph, and they specialize in exactly that, these days. A few of the songs call back to that mashing of genre that was the hallmark of mid 1990’s “Alternative Nation” sensibilities. If that’s the fear- let me point out that an artist uses the tools at hand. What tools are available to Walter Schreifels? What tools would make this a “Quicksand” record, when he could put it out as another thing? I would argue that these tools- dense, layered guitars, requiring compression, with hints of hardcore punk rock, classic heavy metal, reggae, hip hop, and Psychedelic rock, alongside a nearly “shoegaze” in-studio meticulousness are precisely the tools he wants to use to communicate the thoughts of someone in his position of authority, in current conditions. Also, consider everything that would have to be invented and ignored, in order for this to be a nostalgic cash in: whole musical genres would have to have different trajectories- for example, Shoegaze would have to never have found a resurgence, Metalcore would have to have never existed, and so on. Likewise, the theme of alienation paradoxically co-existing with claustrophobia would make no sense without social media, and the Pandemic. So, this is the reaction of a kind of “exiled king”- the leader who never saw himself as a leader, and thus made unpopular choices, and now, after the dust has settled, returns with a sense of earned leadership. Think about how that plays out, and this becomes timely. Besides such artistic validity, it’s an excellent example of what a genre-bound artist can do, while still maintaining the boundaries of that genre. If you like what gets called “Post Hardcore”, or ever did, this is a necessary listen. This is a master inventor proving himself more the master of his invention.

But, what if that relationship is inversed? What if the genre has been given more authority than the artist? That brings us to “R. Pattern” and Fotocrime, the creation of Ryan Patterson. Patterson had long made his name in Hardcore punk rock circles, with Black Cross and Coliseum. He started to chafe in the latter years of Coliseum, bringing in more and more synths, single note guitar lines, moodier, more downtempo songwriting. Eventually, he completely left it behind, adopted the persona of “R Pattern” and labelled his songs under the name “Fotocrime”. The idea in this new incarnation was to go into the genres of Neo Noir, and synth Pop. Since these genres last converged in the early 1980’s, the shadow of early Post Punk and New Wave loom very large over his output. It’s also a set of genres which have long-established conventions, and styles, which are all much more set, and given authority than mr Patterson, a newcomer could have. It’s like trying to do a new production of Greek Tragedy or Shakespeare- not an invalid artistic pursuit, but one with wholly different aesthetic possibilities than the more conventional notions of artistry, where novelty and pioneering are considered far more. Existing within an established framework becomes far more about a push-pull dynamic, and using structure and form as the expression. So, the usual way of talking about this, in these postmodernist informed time, is in references- this bit sounds like Joy Division, that bit sounds like Sisters of Mercy, and so on- because people are trying to see the form as a kind of “badge”- symbols of authority, as a substitute for signs of authenticity. What “R Pattern” is doing strikes me as more about subverting the form, and rejecting the authority of genre. The synth pads ( repeating loops) are set much faster than the tempo, the guitars panned farther out than conventional, the lyrics mismatch the mood of the melody. It’s like if you set a punk rocker, with an overdose of irony to a singer songwriter showcase, where the only instruments available are electronic. Like protest chants written in binary code. Get the idea? The relationship to authority, both cultural, and aesthetic is hostile, but the results are expressive and sincere. Pattern is not “like ________” he is a thought experiment of a reaction to different forms of authority granted to ” ________”. That abstraction is the aesthetic of this. So, it’s less “what if Joy Division wrote Clash songs?” and more You have heard Joy Division and the Clash, and how do they make you feel? To put it right on the nose, it’s a reaction to “you play metal informed hardcore, you cannot find any other expression, no matter how you feel”, and a reaction to all the implied authorities behind such statements. Sunny New Order riffs in service to a dark punk rocker as an act of rebellion, and, yes, authenticity. To borrow from Contrapoints “a Satanic revolt against an omnipotent, omnipresent enemy”- which to us folks who aren’t trying to curry favor with “moderate” democrats is more like an assertion of authentic motives against internalized control.

That brings us to Naked Raygun. “Over the Overlords” is a canny title for a record that marks the first new recordings under the Naked Raygun banner in over 30 years. It can be read in two ways- either as a mark of authority over the recognized masters, or as dismissive of asserted authority altogether- as triumph or exasperation. To understand why that’s canny, you have to look at the position Naked Raygun occupies- they are an extremely underrated band with outsized influence. Regionally, in the upper midwest, they are held as legends, but nationally, they were unknown. The insane part is that from Nirvana to Fall Out Boy, every single platinum selling “punk” band of the 1990’s has at least one song that sounds exactly like Naked Raygun. But, for most of the 1990’s Naked Raygun were gone, and out-of-print. So, it’s not because I’m a fan, but objectively true that with some slight differences in opportunities, Naked Raygun should be held in exactly the same regard as the 1977 UK punk explosion of bands. They belong with the Sex Pistols, Clash, Buzzcocks, Siouxsie & the Banshees, Damned, and Stiff Little Fingers- only from Chicago. As such, they are, in fact, “Over the Overlords” of Punk Rock, but things have moved on, and now they’re over the whole concept of overlords. This is a concept in relation to authority that I can both relate to, and get behind. Yes, it makes me sad that neither Kezdy nor Haggerty is along for this part of the ride (Amended– I have it on good authority that Pierre, as close to death as he was, still made it- Sole Hole Baby and Black and Grey are his. This is huge, as Pierre is a master, and always will be, so it does my cold heart good that he got there), but I still take it like King Richard has returned to vindicate Robin Hood. That is- if it were a just world, Naked Raygun would be rock royalty, with all the authority that should command, but it’s not, and who wants to rule over injustice, anyway? As they put it “I’ve flown high with eagles soaring/ I killed kings and Herman Goering/ I’d take the earth, but it’s just boring”. With the bitterness of “Broken Things”, the sadness of “Ode to Sean Mckeough” ( he was the guy behind “Riot Fest” who was a linchpin to the latter day Chicago scene who very unfortunately died at the age of 42) and the good natured frustration of ‘Living in the good times” it’s obvious they’re better off just being people, not rock gods- and isn’t autonomy better than authority, any day? Thirty years later, that’s still the definitive punk rock statement, and, of course Naked Raygun are the ones to make it.

So, it’s a good thing this isn’t a “review” site. If it were, I’d tell you to listen and watch all of these, and sort the rest out for yourself. Instead, I promised you my thoughts, and these are them. Get over the overlords, and accept no masters.

I know, I know- there goes Max on his “Metal” BS, again. First- that’s really not how I listen to music, nor how I think anyone really listens to music. Even some self identified teenage metalhead is looking for specific sounds, images and thoughts, more than some label So, yes, I never rule out things characterized as “metal” but my aesthetics aren’t now, nor have they ever been ruled by other people’s definitions, and neither have yours. However, there are things associated with “metal’ that are deal breakers for some. For example, the strained, shouted vocals or the tritone, or minor key based modalities.

To that, I would point to natural progressions. Daughters of Saint Crispin is half Russell Emerson Hall- who clearly starts from a dark, angular take on post punk. Ending up on what could be called Doom Metal isn’t such a stretch from that. Likewise, Peter Leonard, the other half, is clearly coming from American Hardcore, and midwestern Noise rock. Again, how big a transition is it really?

Another element to consider: how much does “extreme metal” actually exist? I mean, starting with the “thrash” bands of the 1980’s, it’s well over half based on Punk. Add in the other influences, like blues, Scandinavian folk traditions, French theater, or a million other obscured traditions- and how much does it really mean to call something “doom” or “Black” metal?

So, I really don’t think this is metal- even though I’m pretty sure that fans of doom and black metal might very well find things to love here. That could be a good thing- both as a bridge to other genres, and a deeper understanding of what elements draw you in to the music you already like. However- there is a Metal context but extreme in the “fringe” sense- start with bands like Godflesh and Napalm Death, and work through the various iterations from there.

So, we need to get to the concrete, right? OK, the music is loud, dark, minor key, and slow, even when tremolo picked- the result is musically epic, and at times almost symphonic, in the ‘symphonic Metal’ sense ( that’s- things get bigger and more expansive as they get louder) Think if Swans constricted to a kind of Mayhem aesthetic. That is: the production is spare ( is there any added reverb, even? Though, it should be noted that the drum machine sounds remarkably organic- especially in an “extreme metal” context, where Pro Tools sucks the life out of drummers) the vocals strained ( sometimes in that “strangulated animal scream” Black metal way, but more often in full throated noise rock way. Riffs are straight, if angular, and repetitive in a hypnotic method. Lyrics? I’m not the best at that, but the overall impression is “emotionally political”- you know that thing that early 1990’s midwestern Noise & Emo bands did about putting the voice into a situation informed by economic, social, and political duress? Yeah, that. You’re supposed to list a favorite track, right? Mine is “What you Own, Owns You” even if the ballady nature keeps it off the overall “extreme” vibe. It’s kinda like a Jesu track robbed of the mountain of studio effects, which suits me just fine.

So, do I like it? Yes, a lot. But that’s not my point: my point is that I want you to give it a shot especially if you are not into extreme Metal.

In the language of our current social media- a lot of us view people we don’t know as “NPCs”- non player characters, scripted bits of pseudo artificial intelligence. It’s not quite sociopathic, but it’s certainly not as healthy as it could be. So, I lucked out, here. I have been vaguely aware of Bill Taylor for a very long time. I’m pretty sure he’s the same guy that my cousins at UC Davis mentioned, and that I ran into at Gilman st more than 20 years ago. I know his band is one suggested to me first by Matt Berlyant during one of our epic music arguments, then by Conan Neutron, and now by Jack Rabid. However Bill, and his band have been a bit “NPC” to me. Vaguely aware, but not real to me. Here’s where that’s lucky: Songs for Snakes is a revelation now, and prior, just merely great. What I mean is that, had I first heard them in 2009, I would thought they were ok, but there were better things to give more of my attention. Had I heard them in 2014, they’d be “ones to watch”, but who knows if I would have followed up. No, now in 2021, there is a proper perspective to not only have a new favorite, but to appreciate the vision Bill has.

So, here’s what I am basing this on: I downloaded Songs for Snakes, Charcoal Heather, Crystal Vapour Figure, and Forced Pleasantries from Bandcamp- and listened to them in chronological order. I could hear huge leaps between releases, not just in typical terms of prowess and mastery, but in aesthetics to something I can really appreciate. Also, elements that are fine, but not what I want to hear from Bill are dropped along the way. Where Songs for Snakes are at, now? 100% my kind of thing.

So, if you ask mr. Taylor ( and people have) he’ll say he’s got two main inspirations: Jawbreaker and Husker Du, with some Simon and Garfunkel buried in there. I think that’s unfair. Now, on the first record? Yup, I can hear Blake in the vocal delivery, and some “New Day Rising” era Bob Mould in some of the guitar playing. I also hear some later Jawbox in some of the atonalities, and some Buzzcocks and early Soul Asylum in the tonalities. Overall, it would have been a standout release on Lookout Records in 2002. That’s thing: nothing wrong with that, and I’m not trying to fault it, but Lookout was never my aesthetic, even if Larry & I were friends in the late 1980’s- we had enough mutual tastes to be friends, and trade ideas, but not enough to trade records- make sense?

But then, Charcoal Heather introduces some new aesthetics and devices, and we make our first leap- the most notable is the use of Sugar-era Bob Mould stacked vocals. Keep an ear out for that. The song structures have tightened up significantly as well- it’s much less “one thing at a time”, so you can pick out which idea is referenced, making it a game of musical hairsplitting. Instead, riffs are played on top of passing chords, and melodies are traded between different lines- the transfer of musical juxtapositions creates new sounds- it becomes transformative – like the best of the louder “shoegaze” bands- I hear shades of Ride, Swervedriver, and Lush, but very much in a pop punk context- this is like a more sophisticated version of what the Fat Records bands were trying to do, around 2006. This sharpening of the direction and aesthetic makes the record stand up to the influences: you could play this record right along with Sugar’s “Copper Blue”, or Samiam’s “You are Freaking me Out” with no loss, and looked at as contemporary? The record blows out Blake’s “Thorns of Life” project, or Bob Mould’s “District Line” LP – so, in other words, Bill is most definitely coming into his own on this record, if still somewhat bound by convention and genre.

But, then we get to Crystal Vapour Figure– wow. Ok, remember the stacked vocal thing? I know there are those who will argue, but I have been a massive, massive fan of this technique since 1985, when it was a staple of midwestern hardcore- like Naked Raygun or Husker Du- and this exceeds that, easily. Very easily on par with Bob Mould, or Ride. Still, keep an ear out. Add to this that the songwriting has tightened up to world-class-up there with Bob’s Silver Age record, the Pixies’ Bossanova, and Swervedriver’s Ejector Seat Reservation. Bill Taylor is still in the “alternative rock” category, but to call this pop punk is a massive disservice- I’m thinking that fans of several genres from Post-rock to Folk rock would find some gems of pure love in this record. Mixed at Magpie? ( J Robbins’ legendary studio) Definitely deserves that- and I’m sure that had logistics been easier, this deserves the full J treatment. No apologies from here on out, this is state of the art 3-5 years later.

But, we catch up with 2021 on “Forced Pleasantries“. When Jack Rabid suggested it back in April, I took it with a grain of salt- to my current chagrin- but then put it at #7 in the current Big Takeover- I was intrigued. Holy Cow! Every good thing crammed into one. The stacked vocals are bar none, the finest I have ever heard- yes, better than that. I heard CSN&Y and the Byrds as a small child- this is better. The songs are instant classics- distilling everything I have liked in “Alternative Rock” since before such a term was coined- everything from Dinosaur jr to Pixies, to Jawbox, to Bob Mould’s various incarnations, to Burning Airlines to Ride to gosh, you name it. Absolutely crucial, essential, foundational. I realize more than most that we all have different tastes, so I won’t hold it ( much) against you if you don’t think this is the best record of 2021, but you better damn well understand why I say it is: this is like 2021’s version of 1996’s “Secaucus” by the Wrens- a record that by every single right should be recognized as a stone classic, but might be only because of the vagaries of the music business, forgotten until people catch up and realize that over a third of their favorite musical geniuses are in love with it. The key is that the songs are beyond crafted- the vision is perfectly clear. Every single tone is exactly right, while being completely original. This will be nearly impossible to top. You need to hear this, full stop.

I’ve seen and heard more and more talk about “generations” lately, and I just wanted to add a thought or two for that discussion. See, it varies wildly in terms of usefulness. An awful lot of such talk is just market talk to try to persuade people to buy in on broad new forms of conformity. Another broad swath of these discussions are uninformed and are basically just nationalist dogma. Yet more are just paper fronts to justify bitterness. So, what of those of us who were forced to read Comte, Mill, Mannheim, Heidegger and Strauss-Howe? Still useless, if you ask me.

To prove my point, I’m going to pull a generational theory straight out of my ass, and you tell me if it’s any less applicable than standard theories ( keep in mind, this is false, ok?) Generations are defined by two factors: the 18 year period from birth until adulthood, and major cultural shifts. Cultures are bound by nationalities. So, only applicable to people born in the same nation-state, in the same period of time, between shifts. Here in America, the foundation of the era is bound up in the close of the Civil War. Prior to the Civil War, America was gestational, still in the process of defining the nationality as a distinct identity, and the Civil War completed that process. So, working from that point, there are eight generations- 1865-1893 then 1893-1911 then 1911 to 1929 then 1929-1947, 1947 to 1965, 1965-1983, 1983-2001, and finally 2001-2019. You can point to major historical events aligning with each.

See what I mean? Total garbage, but it seems to be about as reasonable as any. Of course it’s insanely easy to pick apart: does everybody reach adulthood at exactly 18? Don’t people radically change their identities in ways that have nothing to do with nation states? The point proven is that all this stuff is useless. History is boundless change, an endless dialectic, and people aren’t bound up in history.

As to why I’m writing about sociology in a damn pop culture blog- because the crushing of imagination and perspective I’m seeing, as best described by Mark Fisher in both Capitalist Realism and Ghosts of My Life– this notion of Generational Theory is completely bound up in the failures of Capitalism to recognize the dialectic, artistry, or actual human life. Buying into it lessens Art and Expression, and dulls creativity in Culture. So, I’m saying it’s bullshit that stems from Mass Culture, and how much longer must we tolerate mass culture? My answer is right here, right now.