Long Days, Long Months: 16 August

Of course, this argument that "pop" has become an ideology is not a rebuke of "pop" as an idea. Any naming of an artistic movement performs an ideological function: it states what is, and what is not, Punk, or Country, or Rock, or Indie, or Hip Hop, and so on. We should not associate ideology only with government actions, and politicos who don't know how to have fun.

The rebuke comes when "pop" advocates deny any sort of set identity, unwittingly mimicking capitalism's oft-proclaimed non-ideological status. As the "neo-liberals" say, if the marketplace is left alone the self-regulating mechanisms of supply and demand take care of the allocation of goods. And of our hopes and desires as well? "Poptimists" do not to have an "ethnic" identity. Nor do they make any particular demands upon the marketplace - what it offers, they'll surely accept as something worthy of comment, something that brings people together, to party. They don't want any demands placed upon them, and thus they surely wouldn't dare to tell the hit parade (either the listeners or the money makers) what it should accept or embrace. Doing so, they would have to acknowledge an ideology they claim not to have.

In a "pop" world, the place of "noise" is akin to that of terrorism. "Cultural terrorism" reacts to that which has closed off alternatives, thus accepting the ideology of "pop," since of course the alternatives have not been closed off. Real terrorists arise from desperate situations - say, Palestine. In contrast, "cultural terrorism" and "noise" = laziness.

--

Began reading Alain Badiou's Metapolitics, which offers an interesting take (literally interesting, given Badiou's own active involvement) on politics, especially the need to avoid defining one's goals vis-à-vis the state and to understand that politics goes on regardless of philosophy's tendency to judge its successes and failures, evaluate its worth.

And reading Clinton Heylin's Babylon's Burning, a sort of updated, expanded variant of From the Velvets to the Voidoids. An idea presented in the Postlude of the 2005 reissue of the latter became the impetus behind this new book:

"Almost as intriguing personally - if beyond my self-imposed remit - was the idea that such explosions happened simultaneously around the world without reference to each other. If pub-rock was a trial run for punk in England, then it would be fair to say that in the spring and summer of 1974 there were bands in the south of England (Dr Feelgood, Brinsley Schwarz, Kilburn & the High Roads); Sydney, Australia (the devastatingly underrated Radio Birdman); New York (Television, Blondie, the Ramones, Patti Smith) and Cleveland (Mirrors, Electric Eels, RFTT), wholly unaware of each other, yet sharing a common vision, and wanting to make music along essentially parallel lines." [Original emphasis.]

Now, though, that "self-imposed remit" has been cast aside. Good for Mr. Heylin, and good for us! After reading only the first few chapters - including descriptions of how The Saints ended at at a style similar to The Ramones, and reviewing the evidence that the likes of the "Four Johns" and Joe Strummer were inspired by Dr. Feelgood and Ian Dury, not the C B G B bands (who'd they not heard yet) - the book's already a unmitigated pleasure.