well, i doubt im going to win the semantic debate over "sad" as he undoubtedly came across as "sad-sacked" and his early life certainly was damaged but he still managed to live an interesting life (at least from the perspective of a callow viewer) and cultivated a certain degree of success albeit not of a financial nature. and, sure when the music was over and the lights were turned on he was old and alone but that trajectory wasnt guaranteed by his empty hedonism.

im not entirely straight on your notion of host culture but id imagine most of rocks history is littered with debris although glam may have glorified excess in a way that was unprecedented at the time. and id figure glam to be postmodern with its authentic inauthenticity.

i will say the most telling moment for me came when he got into a fight with his friend and former protege who he imagined was stealing his (already dissipated) mojo as a dj at another rock station. his warholian-sized insecurities broke through the placid facade to reveal the broken psyche underneath but in this reality-tv besotted age, his lashing out almost seemed quaint by comparison.


- dave 8-29-2009 1:02 am


well stated. id only parse that for my purposes postmodernism exists as a temporal subset of modernism rather than a replacement mode. glam revitalized an encumbered rock. it reestablished rock and roll by bring back the "and roll" part. its voo doo.

--schwarz
- ree 8-29-2009 2:09 pm [2 comments]





add a comment to this page:

Your post will be captioned "posted by anonymous,"
or you may enter a guest username below:


Line breaks work. HTML tags will be stripped.