Timeless Classics vs. Historical Revolutions

OR:

Accepting The Fate of the Space Time Continuum

Having finished my homework early this afternoon, and presented with an unprecedented break before my next class, I made my way over to the Columbia Bookstore, where I bought Songbook by Nick Hornby, a book I’ve been meaning to buy for quite some time now. The book, which is a collection of essays about some of Hornby’s favorite songs and what they mean to him, has surprisingly good musical analysis given that it was written by a novelist; though, anyone who’s read High Fidelity already knows that Hornby is something of music snob himself.

While I don’t want to review the book itself, I do want to touch upon a topic he brings up during one of the essays. He briefly mentions the difference between hearing a song in it’s historical context, versus hearing it at a later date. While talking about Dylan, he says:

“I regret never having heard any of the songs at the right age, in the right year. What must it have been like to hear “Like a Rolling Stone” in 1966, aged nineteen or twenty?”

He goes on to admit that when he was nineteen in 1976, he heard “White Riot” and “Anarchy in the UK,” but he brushes those singles off as unimportant in the grand scheme of things.

I want to take this discussion in two directions: First, I want to discuss whether hearing Dylan contextually is any more significant than hearing The Clash or the Sex Pistols at the onset of the punk revolution. Second, I want to attempt to deal with the question of what kind of song is more important; the historically relevant song in during that time period, or the timeless song, whose greatness exceeds the bounds of time?

In terms of the folk rock rebellion versus the punk rock insurgency, I would argue that both of these music revolutions were just as important in the history of music. Sure, the folk rebellion was more socially conscious- as these musicians used their music to try to change the world for the better, yet, where the onset of folk rock was innovative in a political sense, the punk rock revolt was novel as a sociological revolution. Here were a bunch of nihilistic teenagers who wanted nothing more than to get drunk, stoned, and maybe play some rock music. The hippies and folksists had San Francisco, and the punks had New York and London. Both movements were significant in their own right, but it’s always easier to look at the revolution that you missed as the more important one- the grass truly is always greener in the other decade. (Pun very much intended.)

What I’m talking about here is not songs that are specifically historical, but whether it’s cooler to hear a revolutionary song when it’s revolutionary, instead of studying it years later. And this is where the issue comes up: should we enjoy music more because we heard it in a specific context, or should we separate context from music, and judge the song/band on it’s/their own right?

One might argue, at first, that the latter choice is ideal, despite the difficulties one might come into separating their emotions from what they like about music. We should, as good music critics, be able to judge music outside of history, which should allow us to properly analyze the music for what it is, and not what it’s connected to. But that is, in my opinion, quite impossible. See, we like music because of the context, and attempting to like it outside of that is almost taking all the fun out of listening. Would I love Pearl Jam as much had I not grown up in the 90s? Possibly, but I’d guess not. These guys inspired me during my adolescence, and thus I have a deeper, albeit unscientific, connection with their music, and the entire Seattle sound that accompanied it.

So yeah, I can appreciate the Rolling Stones not having heard them redefine rock and roll in the late 60s just as much as I can appreciate The Velvet Underground without having been part of the avant-garde art and rock scene either. But I imagine it was probably cooler to have been there when it happened.

The important thing, however, is to not live during your own musical era lamenting that you didn’t grow up in a different decade, but to find the great music of your own years, and someday brag to your kids that you were a fan of “insert band name here” band before they became famous, and you were there at the historic gig at the “insert concert venue here.” That’s kind of what it’s all about.

Bob Dylan- Like A Rolling Stone

The Clash- White Riot

Sex Pistols- Anarchy in the UK

Buy Dylan, The Clash, and the Sex Pistols @ Amazon.com