Print

[throwingks]

This could be in the Music section but I am more interested about the political points.

In the 60s Rock n Roll was extreme compared to the music then. Parents abound hated it, called everyone Satan Worshipers and whatnot. I compare it to the parents today that despise rap/hip-hop. They say it is corrupting our youth, etc.

Do you all think that there is a major difference or not. I am saying no. Rap is a rebellion to the norm just as Rock was back then.

[BCfosheezy]

QUOTE(throwingks @ Dec 30 2006, 07:03 AM)

This could be in the Music section but I am more interested about the political points.

In the 60s Rock n Roll was extreme compared to the music then. Parents abound hated it, called everyone Satan Worshipers and whatnot. I compare it to the parents today that despise rap/hip-hop. They say it is corrupting our youth, etc.

Do you all think that there is a major difference or not. I am saying no. Rap is a rebellion to the norm just as Rock was back then.

 

I wasn't around in the 60's so I can't accurately make the comparison. I must say first that growing up I was subject rap music for years whether it be because of a genuinely liking the song or the humor in it or because someone I was with was playing it. (If you don't understand the humor part... Listen to Master P's "Hooty Hoo". He's dead serious.... that's funny.)

 

Anyways, I don't think it's a positive for music of any sort to glorify killing, substance abuse, or the way sex is abused in rap.

 

Regardless I don't think rap should be censored. In my opinion that's the wrong approach. I believe good parenting can counter outside influences such as this.

[throwingks]

QUOTE

Anyways, I don't think it's a positive for music of any sort to glorify killing, substance abuse, or the way sex is abused in rap.

A lot of songs were about "Sex, Drugs, and Rock n Roll"
The killing part, I cannot think of many Rock songs that directly deal with killing.

I guess I worded my question wrong.

Is Rap as more extreme or less extreme compared to the norm of today (or the 2000s), as Rock was compared to the music of that era (the 60s)?

I think the Baby-Boomer generation as a whole is gonna say Rap is more extreme. I just do not understand why?

[gcskate27]

they would say that rap is more extreme b/c they arent a part of it... it doesnt come from their culture/time so theyre scared of it, much like their parents were scared of rock...

its all pointless really: societies problems do not stem from music...

[throwingks]

Oh, I agree. I just find it hypocritical. I thought maybe I misunderstood the transition Rockers went through.

[_iffy]

Johnny cash wrote a song in the late 50's (i think) where he sang about killing a man just to watch him bleed.
And you know johnny cash has better pronunciation than the average rapper. (point being: It's more in your face)


I think it's the same. They said the same crap about Elvis. Oh he's a soldier of satan, with those devilish hip shaking.

It's not so much that the musics bad, but rather parents who can't control their kids. Seriously. Kids that don't have discipline and who run wild, can't be the result of bad parenting. It must be the music. Or TV, video games, the internet. Anything but their parents.

20 years from now the new music made then will post the same results. "It's corrupting our children!"(try to visualize Mod Flanders saying that.)

[C o s m o]

I think this is fairly simple (IMHO):
60's rock was far more extreme, given it's message.  Listen to the wording, what the artists SAY (Like CCR: "I ain't no senator's son..." for one example, Dylan's song about Reuben Carter, etc)
60's rock invented a new way to protest, easily protected by the constitution.

Rap is only extreme in vulgarity.  Now there was a day when rap had a message but that day has long since passed us by, save for some Kanye West stuff, and a few select others.