Why is it with most teenagers nowadays?

harmonium.ro wrote: It's normal for teenagers to seek for music from the most accessible sources, these being, in growing order of importance: family, friends/peers, media. So it all comes to what's available at the moment, especially in the media. If the "offer" is rich, then the "demand" will sort itself - each personal sensibility will find something to fit its needs, and the spectrum of public taste will be diverse. In my opinion, the available offer in 2010 is very, very limited. No wonder so many kids dumb themselves with crap, that's what they get when they open a TV... A decade and a half ago, during "my time", I was opening the MTV each day after school, and I was finding there on heavy rotation Radiohead, The Verve, U2, Oasis, Blur, Pulp, Metallica, Marilyn Manson, Faith No More, Nirvana, Massive Attack, Tricky, plus other nice pop, electro, hip-hop, etc. A lot of stuff that I still hold fundamental for me. Would I find such a diversity and quality on today's mainstream media? That doesn't mean today's mainstream does not produce lots of nice stuff. Especially in the indie scene. But none of that can be discovered via the mainstream media. You need to find other "alternative people" to become one yourself. I am definitely not going to have a TV when I'll have kids around.

Fully agree, the 90's were an amazing period with lots of quality music that managed to reach youngsters.
I've not seen that in the 00's, partly because I haven't followed the indie scene anymore, but also because you really need to go out on a discovery of your own now to be able to find good music.
But who wants to do that with all the possible choices of entertainment and distractions we have now.




Edited by Bonnek - June 06 2010 at 07:48

Very interesting topic.

I´m not too old myself to recall the time about 8 years ago, when I was about 16 and started to gradually feel more passionate about prog. You see, the thing is, it´s not really easy to like (neither find out about) progressive music when you´re a teenager. When you have MTV (it´s just sad what it has become nowadays) and the pop industry washing the collective brain of your generation, then your musical growth is to be crippled for many years.

Now how many people after that find the strength, need and willingness to evolve futher in their tastes and even passionately like a certain genre or an artist when they grow up? Not many. For them, music eventually becomes a nameless, uniform backgound sound on the car stereo.

Coming back to my second point. Why did I say, it´s not easy for teens to LIKE prog? Well, because listening to pop is as easy as watching Teletubbies on TV, while listening to prog is like reading books. Don´t get me wrong - I´m not trying to belittle teenagers here. I´m trying to say that for every new discovery you have to cover a certain path.

Lastly, we should not forget about the meaning of music either. As I have learned, then in the 60´s and 70´s when prog was born, music was about values, current affairs, even politics - all the means to sense or give meaning to the world people lived in (Pink Floyd and countless other examples). There was also a lot of fantasy in it (the whole idea behind a concept album). All that bonded and united a lot of people and created generations with broader view about the power of music. In these days pop music tends to promote hedonistic and egocentric values that are timeless of course, but don´t talk about much more than shallow emotions. Also much of musical craftsmanship seems to have been replaced by sexy dance moves.  

I´m not pessimistic though. There will always be young people who will enjoy and, in the future, make magnificent progressive music themselves.

I would quote Joe Jackson's Beat Crazy here entirely, but I've been spanked it the forum for quoting too much.
"Kids today - they’re all the same
All call themselves - some crazy name
All those drugs - they can’t be sane
All that noise - affects their brains"

http://www.lyricsfreak.com/j/joe+jackson/beat+crazy_20072635.html



Edited by Slartibartfast - June 07 2010 at 18:33

OK, you've convinced me, we're all doomed. 
But hey, we're all going to die anyway, though it may take a while...


Edited by Slartibartfast - June 07 2010 at 19:15

^ " Boring" is a complaint  I hear too often as a teacher, Clarke.

Peter wrote: Yes, Slart -- people have complained about teens since time immemorial, but communication is changing rapidly. Younger generations will reflect that change most strongly, of course.   We mostly think with words -- LOL.   Thinking and communication are becoming more perfunctory, disjointed and visual -- here's a cute picture so everyone can understand how I feel about that, as an English teacher and lover of language:     Look at advertising and journalism -- studies show that ads steadily get shorter, paragraphs get shorter, sentences get shorter, sentence fragments become the norm, graphic novels become "literature." Movies get louder, with less dialogue, and more (usually violent) action. Modern novels contain less and less description. When you read a story, a "movie" (visuals) should "play" in your head. Studies indicate we're losing that ability.   Today, most folks do most of their reading on the internet. Here, the tendency is not to read in a linear fashion, but to scan a web page -- almost no one reads the whole thing. Just look how visual and pictorial this very "written" medium is -- even on a forum: avatars, ads, emoticons. pictures for "signatures," etc, etc.   It's all connected, and driven by technology. First the camera, then the TV, now the computer and photographic cell phone. We are more "connected" via technology, yet more isolated within our private, virtual worlds. Look around you on a bus, in a waiting room, or at a gathering of teens. Look for the personal machines -- note the lack of prolonged conversation -- connection -- with other humans.   Most people on this forum will be basically unwilling unable to read a post this long. They cannot focus that long -- it takes effort, and facility with language (thinking & communication skills).      POST TOO LONG -- DON'T READ!   (View porn or play fast, bright, loud, pretty games instead.)

You can't blame them...it's not stylish to enjoy artistic expression nowadays.

MusicForSpeedin wrote: I feel the same way about a lot of people that listen to and love prog. All of the fan boys of certain bands such as Tool, Porcupine Tree, Genesis, Yes, King Crimson, etc. etc. don't seem too different from the kids that love Lady Gaga, Justin Bieber, and Katy Perry. There is nothing inherently bad about the music of today. To hate music of today is just a stupid as the kid that says, "This is longer than 5 minutes so it sucks." I enjoy coming to this site and listening to prog., but if I honestly sat around all day listening to ITCOTCK or SEBTP I would get bored instantly. I just had a talk with some friend about prog and we talked about how it seems pointless to look at a modern band and consider them progressive when all they do is expand on a formula used forty years ago. This idea has a lot to do with why I find it hard to get into "modern prog." because it is no longer interesting.  It is useful to know what is going on in the world of music as of today with such genres as math-rock, which is listed on this site, chillwave, ambient, and whatever else. Prog. isn't the end all of music. Hopefully this doesn't come across as harsh.

It doesn't come across as harsh. But, I think there is a huge generation gap with various individuals and the agree to disagree applied to social life today is a shield for many. In the case of a DJ sampling a section of Tubular Bells by Mike Oldfield or Tangerine Dream's Rubycon in a rap song on Halloween night is ignorant to me. When things like this happen I have more then a cause to hate music of today. So it's the representation of a rap tune and not Tubular Bells.....but, then why bother at all? It's out of bounds. It's out of true character. Those on the dance floor who like it seem to think  that it is a bit dark or avant-garde to do things in this way. It takes the Avant-Garde out of the Avant-Garde. People like I suppose but, it doesn't present respect for the artist that made sacrifices to compose it and release it.

How sad.

The summary is:
"Most of today's teenagers don't like contemprorary art of any kind."
I mean 1920-1980 as contemprorary.

But it's problably because art music requires high talent (which they don't have). You know if you can sing (I know you can. I heard you in shower!) and if you are sexy... *bang* you became a pop star. Can you utter nonsense while trashing a guitar?... *bang* you became a screamo. Are you sad? *bang* you became an emo. Can you speak fast? *bang* you became a politician... I mean rapper. But no-one can become an "art"ist (with art in bold) so easily, it requires extremely high talent but seems like no-one has it..


Edited by CyberDiablo - June 08 2010 at 12:39

MusicForSpeedin wrote: WalterDigsTunes wrote: MusicForSpeedin wrote: There is nothing inherently bad about the music of today. Except for the fact that it is entirely derivative and has awful production values... You realize everything is derivative right? Frank Zappa rips off Edgard Varese.

Edited by MusicForSpeedin - June 08 2010 at 13:00