![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
I spent pretty much all of yesterday on the Internet. I'm very lazy, in case you haven't realized that. Recently, I've started reading my livejournal friends' own friends' lists. Strangers' journals often come off as boring or hard to follow, but I've come across some interesting entries that way. I'm usually scared to leave comments on the journals of people I don't know, even when I have something relevant to say. As I've said before, I welcome strangers' comments on my own journal, but I don't really know whether other people feel the same way.
Recently, I came across a comment from Alice Cooper denouncing anti-Bush rock concerts, as well as mixing rock with politics in general. He said, "I call it treason against rock 'n' roll because rock is the antithesis of politics. Rock should never be in bed with politics...If you're listening to a rock star in order to get your information on who to vote for, you're a bigger moron than they are. Why are we rock stars? Because we're morons." He's apparently not alone in this opinion, as evidenced by a post that was made to alt.music.tmbg a few weeks ago, regarding John Flansburgh's "trashing of the President" in the They Might Be Giants e-mail newsletter. Now, I'd say there's some merit in saying that you shouldn't use rock stars as viable sources for political information. You also shouldn't use my journal to decide who to vote for, but that doesn't mean I'm going to refrain to sharing my own political views here. Alice and Eric's comments imply that musicians have LESS right to discuss politics than anyone else does, and I can't agree with that. Do Flansy, Bruce Springsteen, and {gag} Dave Matthews not have the same right to free speech that you and I do? The whole bit about rock as "the antithesis of politics" strikes me as a ridiculous viewpoint anyway. I'm generally opposed to the idea that musical genres should be linked to attitudes. You can play or listen to, say, punk rock without being a punk, or gangsta rap without being a gangsta, and these genres are much narrower than the incredibly broad "rock and roll." Saying rock is anti-politics is sort of akin to saying it's the Devil's music (What about Christian rock, Jack Chick's opinion notwithstanding), or that it's rude music used by kids to annoy their parents (What about soft rock?).
Of course, being overtly political, or even controversial in general, in music can be a dangerous thing. I'm sure fans have been driven away by bands coming out in favor of viewpoints they oppose. I can certainly enjoy music that expresses an opinion I disagree with, but there's a difference between ideas I just don't agree with and ones that make me downright angry. On the other hand, as Eminem says, "We need a little controversy," and I'll bet controversial political opinions on the parts of bands have sometimes attracted new fans. Take the Dixie Chicks' comments about being embarrassed to come from the same state as Bush, for instance. I've heard of Dixie Chicks fans losing respect for the group because of this, but also of people who don't care for their music GAINING respect for them. So it works both ways, and it's something musicians (or any celebrities, I suppose) should think about before doing. I think they have just as much right to hold and express strong political views as any of the rest of us, though.
Incidentally, I don't remember where I first saw the Alice Cooper quote, but when I did a Google search to find it again, the first two results were conservative websites. Of those, the first one had a link to an article with the headline "Linda Ronstadt: I don't like singing for Christians," but with the actual quote from Ronstadt only applying to fundamentalists, not Christians in general, and just saying that singing for them is "a real conflict" for her. (Yes, they lie about the quote in an article that ACTUALLY CONTAINS THE QUOTE, or at least part of it, which seems to me to demonstrate how stupid they expect their readers to be.) The second one crashed my browser.
Recently, I came across a comment from Alice Cooper denouncing anti-Bush rock concerts, as well as mixing rock with politics in general. He said, "I call it treason against rock 'n' roll because rock is the antithesis of politics. Rock should never be in bed with politics...If you're listening to a rock star in order to get your information on who to vote for, you're a bigger moron than they are. Why are we rock stars? Because we're morons." He's apparently not alone in this opinion, as evidenced by a post that was made to alt.music.tmbg a few weeks ago, regarding John Flansburgh's "trashing of the President" in the They Might Be Giants e-mail newsletter. Now, I'd say there's some merit in saying that you shouldn't use rock stars as viable sources for political information. You also shouldn't use my journal to decide who to vote for, but that doesn't mean I'm going to refrain to sharing my own political views here. Alice and Eric's comments imply that musicians have LESS right to discuss politics than anyone else does, and I can't agree with that. Do Flansy, Bruce Springsteen, and {gag} Dave Matthews not have the same right to free speech that you and I do? The whole bit about rock as "the antithesis of politics" strikes me as a ridiculous viewpoint anyway. I'm generally opposed to the idea that musical genres should be linked to attitudes. You can play or listen to, say, punk rock without being a punk, or gangsta rap without being a gangsta, and these genres are much narrower than the incredibly broad "rock and roll." Saying rock is anti-politics is sort of akin to saying it's the Devil's music (What about Christian rock, Jack Chick's opinion notwithstanding), or that it's rude music used by kids to annoy their parents (What about soft rock?).
Of course, being overtly political, or even controversial in general, in music can be a dangerous thing. I'm sure fans have been driven away by bands coming out in favor of viewpoints they oppose. I can certainly enjoy music that expresses an opinion I disagree with, but there's a difference between ideas I just don't agree with and ones that make me downright angry. On the other hand, as Eminem says, "We need a little controversy," and I'll bet controversial political opinions on the parts of bands have sometimes attracted new fans. Take the Dixie Chicks' comments about being embarrassed to come from the same state as Bush, for instance. I've heard of Dixie Chicks fans losing respect for the group because of this, but also of people who don't care for their music GAINING respect for them. So it works both ways, and it's something musicians (or any celebrities, I suppose) should think about before doing. I think they have just as much right to hold and express strong political views as any of the rest of us, though.
Incidentally, I don't remember where I first saw the Alice Cooper quote, but when I did a Google search to find it again, the first two results were conservative websites. Of those, the first one had a link to an article with the headline "Linda Ronstadt: I don't like singing for Christians," but with the actual quote from Ronstadt only applying to fundamentalists, not Christians in general, and just saying that singing for them is "a real conflict" for her. (Yes, they lie about the quote in an article that ACTUALLY CONTAINS THE QUOTE, or at least part of it, which seems to me to demonstrate how stupid they expect their readers to be.) The second one crashed my browser.
