May 31, 2009

The Influence Of The Internet

Let’s jump off from where Daniel's comment from the previous post left off: The Internet.

I agree with him, music is alive and well today. There is a ton of great music being produced every day and we all know that just because it’s popular, it doesn’t necessarily mean that it’s good. So what role as the internet played in this decade lacking a musical voice?

The internet, and the ability that every Tom, Dick and Harry have to download music and seek out alternative forms of music that aren’t on the radio is playing a huge role for today’s music lover. How else would they come to know bands that aren’t being force fed to them by the mainstream media?

Music fans and artists alike have to be thrilled about the internet’s capability to make any sound, any artist and any song available world wide. But as good as it is for the exposure of new music, what harm is it doing to our identity?

The internet to the music industry is what expansion is to the NHL. Sure, you get a lot more players involved in the game and open yourself up to potential revenues from un-tapped markets, but you also water down your product. No?

Did artists like Elvis, the Beatles and Michael Jackson benefit from a pre-internet era, or were they just that special? I would argue the latter.

Even in my own life, the internet has exposed me to bands that I would not know of otherwise, Daniel alluded to Animal Collective – they are one. The Avett Brothers, Dr. Dog, TV On The Radio, Vampire Weekend, and Citizen Cope have all taken up space on my iPod with thanks to the internet.

I like that internet is allowing us to seek out and enjoy more diverse and eclectic music, but shouldn’t such a mass communicator like the internet produce more global artists that we all know? We all seem to be living in our own little musical worlds, enjoying what we want to enjoy, isolated and not interested in what everyone else is listening to – and that that may be all well and good, but it doesn’t answer the initial question: Where is our unifier? What is our legacy?

Or did I already answer my question?

Is our legacy just that – that we have no one or two artists to define us? Is this generation simply defined by our own personal musical tastes? Time magazine dubbed “YOU” the person of the year a few years back. At first they were mocked by readers and pop culture critics for proclaiming that we were all the person of the year for doing just what we are talking about: seeking out and enjoying what we like individually, and not what is being fed to us by the media. Maybe they were right.

I still like to believe that somewhere out there is an artist or personality that will rise up above the rest and make the world take notice, someone who will be remembered and revered for the next 50 years... there has to be. Who knows, maybe they might just use the internet to reach that global fame and respect.

To be continued...

1 comment:

  1. time must pass for our "legacy", or whatever you call it, to take shape.

    i know what you mean when you talk about a few bands representing a decade but i don't always think it's that simple.

    but for fun, here are some observations about the '00s:
    -Radiohead - sure, they were most popular in the 90s and are hardly mainstream darlings anymore, but they're almost universally acknowledged as one of the best band of our generation. still, i don't think their sound is generation defining (in the same way floyd's wasn't).
    -U2/Coldplay - super popular pop-rock that will be remembered, but not as reps of our generation.
    -Kanye West - this dude will probably have some staying power for his ability to cross over to mainstream success. if he had died then he'd have been crowned rap's cobain.
    -i'm seriously starting to think that skinny jeans and cardigans will be our equivalent of bell-bottoms and big collars.

    i'm tired. no more.

    ReplyDelete