But he hit it big and had bigger aspirations which he’s turned into reality it seems. Though I gave up on him after Grantland (was sold, went under, whatever happened to it). To me, he just doesn’t have the same edge now that he’s been on tv, doing podcasts, etc., which I assume comes with the territory.
I’m not saying I’m into Barstool or anything like that but there is a void between the mainstream corporation-based reporting and that which targets the LCD.
But once he left ESPN and started up his own gang through Grantland and The Ringer, he’s kind of cultivated an elitist sports/pop culture mentality via those who work/worked for him (with a few exceptions). So it’s no surprise to me that this Woodstock documentary took the direction it did when you have Steven Hyden and the rest involved with it.
then maybe stop bringing up other festivals where many aspects were completely different?
Quote:
I'm saying lax security, heat, and the occasional naked breast don't typically make people burn a place down.
based on your first post - it sure seems like you're blaming the likes Fred Durst, Metallica, and Kid Rock - which is absurd given there were no riots on teh days they played.
Quote:
If your argument is uncomfortable camping and candles make people burn things down at the end -- better call of 6th Bible camp. Those tents sucked, and the vigils are pure d.a.n.g.e.r.
calling the conditions at Woodstock 99 "uncomfortable camping" is quite the understatement, lol.
It was....meh. Tool was awesome, but there really wasn't anyone else I was dying to see. Devo was supposed to play but dropped off the the tour right before I was going, which sucked. Korn kinda sucked. There were a bunch of shitty techno acts that all sounded the same. Eels were pretty good. Snoop was kinda funny - seemed like half the rapping was done by the other guys on stage, none of whom I knew.
then maybe stop bringing up other festivals where many aspects were completely different?
I’m responding to your initial assertion that lax security and inadequate systems are the simple explanation — and I think that’s naive. I’ve been to plenty of festivals with lax security and inadequate accommodations — and no one burned anything down or raped anyone.
In terms of safety and perception of safety, I don’t think Collective Soul and Our Lady Peace fans are likely to be game for a metal show/fanbase and it’s a bad mix to include Godsmack and Megadeth on the same bill. I love Megadeth, but I know what I’m getting into typically if they are on the main stage at a festival. I can certainly see how a Collective Soul fan could be taken off guard, and I think that’s part of the bad PR.
In terms of low IQ dolts like Fred Durst and Kid Rock — I’m very comfortable laying some responsibility on them. If you bring an act on stage spouting misogynistic and/or ignorant violent rhetoric, and violence occurs in the moment or the next day, I’m willing to make the connection with the motivation and fanbase.
Never knew his background story. I never looked into him more than knowing that one song he did with Gwen Stefani and being Mr. Opinion on Eminem. He didn't exactly hypnotize anyone for being the most exciting person in the world.
Forgive me, and it's been 22 years since I watched the performance (and that word is used more times a day than the word "chair") but what exactly did durst say that was misogynistic?
I don't understand how you can invite Limp Bizkit and Kid Rock
and then not expect them to be Limp Bizkit and Kid Rock? Why isn't DMX getting any blame? Or any of the other aggro performers? The heat, lack of security, the piss poor facilities, lack of water, and then the music was probably the cherry on top. Of course, this all seems rather predictable, people are more aggressive when hot and you are going to have a concert in the middle of the summer on a tarmac with a bunch of aggresive performers and not hire adequate security was moronic. It was cutting corners to maximize profits, which was kind of the theme of the soulless cash grab that was Woodstock 99. The ironic part is with an iota of foresight, they could have cashed in for years and years.
Fun fact - I found out there were more deaths at the original woodstock than woodstock 99 today.
Never knew his background story. I never looked into him more than knowing that one song he did with Gwen Stefani and being Mr. Opinion on Eminem. He didn't exactly hypnotize anyone for being the most exciting person in the world.
I never thought much of him or about him but his remake of "That's When I Reach For My Revolver" is a good song.
Other than that the only reason I even know who Moby is was because he was allegedly maced and beaten outside the Paradise Club in Boston.
Moby is like 5 5" and 110 pounds, with the body of a frail old lady, I always found it curious who attacks that guy (and it wasn't a robbery or anything from what I read)
The heat, the poor conditions, and the price gouging were the main
culprits. The nature of many of the acts may have exacerbated things, ok, but absent the terrible planning and the weather I don' think it plays out the way it did
Forgive me, and it's been 22 years since I watched the performance (and that word is used more times a day than the word "chair") but what exactly did durst say that was misogynistic?
I wasn’t referring to Durst (thus and/or) — I was referring to Kid Rock. I believe the quote I caught in the documentary was something like “Monica Lewinsky is a fucking ho, and Bill Clinton is a goddamned pimp.” Excellent take there, Bob.
Forgive me, and it's been 22 years since I watched the performance (and that word is used more times a day than the word "chair") but what exactly did durst say that was misogynistic?
I wasn’t referring to Durst (thus and/or) — I was referring to Kid Rock. I believe the quote I caught in the documentary was something like “Monica Lewinsky is a fucking ho, and Bill Clinton is a goddamned pimp.” Excellent take there, Bob.
RE: I don't understand how you can invite Limp Bizkit and Kid Rock
Of course, this all seems rather predictable, people are more aggressive when hot and you are going to have a concert in the middle of the summer on a tarmac with a bunch of aggresive performers and not hire adequate security was moronic. It was cutting corners to maximize profits, which was kind of the theme of the soulless cash grab that was Woodstock 99.
That’s exactly it — you add all these factors together and you get a fiasco.
As fucking brain dead as Kid Rock and Fred Durst are, their shows don’t all end in sexual assaults and fires.
You pull any of the variables out, and the outcome is much different.
Sure — maybe at the time that wasn’t a completely sensibility offending comment. But Kid Rock’s entire act at that point was dipshit instigator who said and performed brain dead things to get attention and stir things up.
Can’t be surprised when the fan base of an idiot gets stirred up when the idiot stirs them up.
I feel pretty confident being right in any argument where I’m on the side of calling Kid Rock a moron.
who were booked for a gig and proceeded to perform in accordance with the way their act was known seems silly to me.
The organizers should have known what they were getting with ICP, Limp Bizkit, Kid Rock types - its no secret. Like booking Phish and being offended by the odour.
In defense of Woodstock '99 - at least none of the acts almost got electrocuted to death!
who were booked for a gig and proceeded to perform in accordance with the way their act was known seems silly to me.
The organizers should have known what they were getting with ICP, Limp Bizkit, Kid Rock types - its no secret. Like booking Phish and being offended by the odour.
In defense of Woodstock '99 - at least none of the acts almost got electrocuted to death!
I'm definitely not blaming the artists for the outcomes, though being a dip shit is certainly blame worthy on a more universal scale.
The blame definitely lies with the promoters and organizers.
but at least on this thread I haven't seen anyone actually blame the criminal criminals - you know the fans who actually committed the sexual assaults, rapes, thefts, vandalism, arsons, etc. only other criminals like the organizers and the acts (which is a pretty weak shirking of accountability - Fred Durst said to break stuff so I'm going to rape someone and start a fire)...
Quote:
Hey man, leave the kids alone. I've had enough of the frenzied demonization of young people surrounding Woodstock '99. Yes, Woodstock was filled with predators: the degenerate idiots who assaulted those women, the greedy promoters who wrung every cent out of thirsty concertgoers, and last but not least, the predator media that turned a blind eye to real violence and scapegoated the quarter of a million music fans at Woodstock '99, the vast majority of whom had the time of their lives.
Kid Rock is kind of a good example of what happens when you start
maligning massive groups of people that are essentially powerless. I could be wrong, but it seems to me that the mid to late 90s is the first time there was this demonization of all white dudes. Meanwhile the working poor and middle class white dudes are like staring at each other like what the fuck did I do. I think that's where a lot of the anger in popular music is coming from. I mean look at Sheryl Crow's statement to MTV at the time, which was virtue signaling her audience before that was even a term (who dated a notorious racist and has a song that romanticizes him in song, essentially the only reason they broke up was because he cheated).
Is Kid Rock a piece of shit? Yeah probably, but he's just a symptom of the disease, not the disease itself. It was blowback and something we see ratcheted up 1000 today. Music becomes popular just tends to be a reflection of what people want, not the artists themselves (although for the most part, it takes talent to get to that point).
The documentary does get a couple of things right, that these issues are much harder to solve than the symptoms, so the symptoms get demonized. Also, people in large groups are going to be susceptible to the mob mentality and are going to do things completely out of character (or at least extremely exaggerated). This we know is backed by solid science.
is a human right, but it's also not a good look and in many cases makes you look worse judging people (who you don't really know) than the people you're judging.
Not only has he been responsible for this turd (full disclosure - I don't subscribe so I haven't seen it, but all the descriptions sound terrible), but his stupid website actually did an EIGHT PART podcast on Woodstock '99 a few years ago! Eight goddamned hours?
Is that true? The Ringer did an eight hour podcast on Woodstock '99? I wouldn't listen to an eight hour podcast on the original Woodstock, much less than the one in '99.
I said this before and I'll say it again. When I was a kid all of the adults complained about Eminem and his lyrics. Now I'm an adult and all the kids are complaining about his lyrics.
Same with Limp Bizkit and their shenanigans. Pretty interesting window to grow up during, I'd say.
Durst and his band make a very convenient scapegoat. Virtually no one will admit to being a fan of theirs anymore. Durst has been an object of ridicule for quite a while now. So, you can hurl pretty any accusation at them.
I don’t know much about the individuals who acted like idiots in the crowd, but I do know from people in the industry Kid Rock is asshole bozo (shouldn’t shock anyone), I know John Scher is gutless dork, and Michael Lang is a decent guy who’s made a number of bad business decisions and partnerships.
In my view there are two elements of responsibility — the organizers and acts who set the stage, and the individual idiots in the crowd who did things on a spectrum from irresponsible to reprehensible.
I completely believe the accounts from the organizers they asked a number of performers, including Durst and Kid Rock to chill out because security wasn’t keeping up, and instead they acted like dicks.
This has been his kick lately - that 99 was this watershed year that led to where we are today. Maybe he saw the success of LJ Wertheim's Glory Days book on 1984 and wanted to ride that wave, I don't know. He and Chris Ryan seem to sometimes have lived in a different world than I have.
I don't find Woodstock 99 to be that culturally significant, it was Fyre Fest with major corporate sponsors and MTV.
This has been his kick lately - that 99 was this watershed year that led to where we are today. Maybe he saw the success of LJ Wertheim's Glory Days book on 1984 and wanted to ride that wave, I don't know. He and Chris Ryan seem to sometimes have lived in a different world than I have.
I don't find Woodstock 99 to be that culturally significant, it was Fyre Fest with major corporate sponsors and MTV.
That's a really stupid thesis then - Woodstock '99 was a blip. I think I can remember one cultural reference to it ever - a Simpsons joke where Otto says he met his fiancee during "the summer of love - Woodstock '99" amidst a flashback of fires and rampaging mobs.
That's it. Can't think of another one. It happened, it was a story for a little while afterward, and then it was largely forgotten.
do I get the impression that a poster actually believes that something Kid Rock said inspired a person a day or days later to go sexually assault someone?
Also, I've seen that comparison to Fyre Fest more than a few times
And while it would seem to be an easy comparison, Fyre Fest was a straight-up scam. It didn't actually happen. Woodstock 99 was very poorly executed, but the attendees did see a lot of great music (and some terrible music too). You just had to endure blast-furnace heat, no bathrooms, and $6 bottles of water to see it.
than people give him credit for. I saw an interview with him for one of his movies (he's a director), where he explicitly states that "Fred Durst in the Red Hat is a character". His demeanor and tone is completely different.
He isn't the greatest musician, which he admits -- but he is a frontman and someone who has a natural penchant for being an entertainer. He surrounded himself with great musicians (whether you love or hate Limp Bizkit, Wes Borland is an incredible guitarist) and basically was going to find a way to make himself famous within the entertainment industry one way or the other.
He played the game.
Having said that, he absolutely can still be a huge dick at times and went through a massive streak of being a bully in the late 90s before it all fell apart for Limp Bizkit's mainstream popularity in the early 00s, as nu metal faded and pop punk/emo + 2001 revival bands started taking over the (admittedly shrinking) spotlight that rock music occupied in public consciousness
Or Bob, as he called him. He actually was a rich kid - dad owned a car dealership, which is kind of hilarious. Said he wasn't a bad guy but he wanted to be a rapper, which doesn't really work if you're a rich white kid, so he constructed this ridiculous persona for himself.
I hated Limp Bizkit so very much in those days, but the piling on it they have received over Woodstock makes me much more sympathetic. As far as aggressive bands and onstage antics go, I watched Rage set fire to an American flag on stage. That's kind of incendiary, no? And they certainly didn't play mellow music. Yet they escape blame because their politics are more to the liking of music journalists, compared to the easily scapegoated meatheads of Limp Bizkit.
The more we talk about it, the sillier this stupid documentary sounds.
What was described about Kid Rock above was actually what I always heard about Rage Against the Machine. Maybe just the singer? I think his dad was a dentist and he was a big-time yuppie and then just talked about revolting in blah blah blah then went home to his mansion.
I always got the impression that those Southern California punk rock (or whatever) bands were of the same nature.
I think a lot of these celebrity musicians don't live or have the background they lead on.
What was described about Kid Rock above was actually what I always heard about Rage Against the Machine. Maybe just the singer? I think his dad was a dentist and he was a big-time yuppie and then just talked about revolting in blah blah blah then went home to his mansion.
I always got the impression that those Southern California punk rock (or whatever) bands were of the same nature.
I think a lot of these celebrity musicians don't live or have the background they lead on.
Yeh this weird idea we have in this country that individual success is built from pure talent and hard work is a weird one. The only thing you see that is in sports, essentially every other career is built based on the success of the prior generation of parents, especially something like music. It’s massively disproportional the amount of well known artists that came from privileged backgrounds.
I think the message of the documentary was sloppy, and it's sloppy to draw straight lines between cause and effect.
The weather, the tents, the cost of water, the acts, and the promoters didn't make anyone do anything.
But history is littered with examples of people doing things they otherwise wouldn't given the right circumstances and the right encouragement.
I think it's worth wondering if:
1) staging an event with poor facilities in the heat
2) not providing adequate security
3) booking acts who create a market for stupidity or worse
4) booking acts who create a market for rebellion or worse
5) not dialing down the antagonizing when it was clear security was failing
What was described about Kid Rock above was actually what I always heard about Rage Against the Machine. Maybe just the singer? I think his dad was a dentist and he was a big-time yuppie and then just talked about revolting in blah blah blah then went home to his mansion.
I always got the impression that those Southern California punk rock (or whatever) bands were of the same nature.
I think a lot of these celebrity musicians don't live or have the background they lead on.
Maybe Dr. Dexter Holland - the singer/lead guitarist from the Offspring?
He was his class valedictorian, full ride to USC and now has a doctorate in molecular biology.
doesn't mean he can't be a punk rocker. Angst is angst. right?
the Clash, specifically Joe Strummer, struggled with this concept as the band became more successful. Strummer did not have a wealthy upbringing but was solidly middle class, not exactly oppressed/etc.
Didn't say it as if it were unimaginable for someone to be smart and shit but you do kind of have to roll your eyes a bit. They were the ones who had an anarchy symbol on their jet?
I think that guitarist from Green Day (Mike Dirnt) is just a big snob with tattoos who plays pop punk rock.
Didn't say it as if it were unimaginable for someone to be smart and shit but you do kind of have to roll your eyes a bit. They were the ones who had an anarchy symbol on their jet?
I think that guitarist from Green Day (Mike Dirnt) is just a big snob with tattoos who plays pop punk rock.
Its a performance. Tom Waits isn't an alcoholic living in a flophouse - doesn't detract from the persona or the performance.
Sure but the whole image/scene of punk rock is sleeping in a British apartment with 16 people on the floor, not some rich boy in California talking about the system and ... You know. They're posers lol
Sorry I just read a lot of Vice magazine back in the day. Ha.
Mick Jones didn't have much of a different upbringing than Strummer other than being a non-practicing (I think) jew and dealing with the oppression of that in London .
yet they could preach all day about "the man" and had credibility.
Unless you grew up like Sid Vicious you're probably not writing/singing from experience.
I think the poser angle is more relevant in hip hop or rap than punk.
But he hit it big and had bigger aspirations which he’s turned into reality it seems. Though I gave up on him after Grantland (was sold, went under, whatever happened to it). To me, he just doesn’t have the same edge now that he’s been on tv, doing podcasts, etc., which I assume comes with the territory.
I’m not saying I’m into Barstool or anything like that but there is a void between the mainstream corporation-based reporting and that which targets the LCD.
But once he left ESPN and started up his own gang through Grantland and The Ringer, he’s kind of cultivated an elitist sports/pop culture mentality via those who work/worked for him (with a few exceptions). So it’s no surprise to me that this Woodstock documentary took the direction it did when you have Steven Hyden and the rest involved with it.
then maybe stop bringing up other festivals where many aspects were completely different?
based on your first post - it sure seems like you're blaming the likes Fred Durst, Metallica, and Kid Rock - which is absurd given there were no riots on teh days they played.
calling the conditions at Woodstock 99 "uncomfortable camping" is quite the understatement, lol.
And when they had a song in a Ben Stiller movie.
Quote:
I'm not making an apples to apples comparison.
then maybe stop bringing up other festivals where many aspects were completely different?
I’m responding to your initial assertion that lax security and inadequate systems are the simple explanation — and I think that’s naive. I’ve been to plenty of festivals with lax security and inadequate accommodations — and no one burned anything down or raped anyone.
In terms of safety and perception of safety, I don’t think Collective Soul and Our Lady Peace fans are likely to be game for a metal show/fanbase and it’s a bad mix to include Godsmack and Megadeth on the same bill. I love Megadeth, but I know what I’m getting into typically if they are on the main stage at a festival. I can certainly see how a Collective Soul fan could be taken off guard, and I think that’s part of the bad PR.
In terms of low IQ dolts like Fred Durst and Kid Rock — I’m very comfortable laying some responsibility on them. If you bring an act on stage spouting misogynistic and/or ignorant violent rhetoric, and violence occurs in the moment or the next day, I’m willing to make the connection with the motivation and fanbase.
Forgive me, and it's been 22 years since I watched the performance (and that word is used more times a day than the word "chair") but what exactly did durst say that was misogynistic?
Fun fact - I found out there were more deaths at the original woodstock than woodstock 99 today.
I never thought much of him or about him but his remake of "That's When I Reach For My Revolver" is a good song.
Other than that the only reason I even know who Moby is was because he was allegedly maced and beaten outside the Paradise Club in Boston.
Moby is like 5 5" and 110 pounds, with the body of a frail old lady, I always found it curious who attacks that guy (and it wasn't a robbery or anything from what I read)
Forgive me, and it's been 22 years since I watched the performance (and that word is used more times a day than the word "chair") but what exactly did durst say that was misogynistic?
I wasn’t referring to Durst (thus and/or) — I was referring to Kid Rock. I believe the quote I caught in the documentary was something like “Monica Lewinsky is a fucking ho, and Bill Clinton is a goddamned pimp.” Excellent take there, Bob.
Quote:
misogynistic ...
Forgive me, and it's been 22 years since I watched the performance (and that word is used more times a day than the word "chair") but what exactly did durst say that was misogynistic?
I wasn’t referring to Durst (thus and/or) — I was referring to Kid Rock. I believe the quote I caught in the documentary was something like “Monica Lewinsky is a fucking ho, and Bill Clinton is a goddamned pimp.” Excellent take there, Bob.
That’s exactly it — you add all these factors together and you get a fiasco.
As fucking brain dead as Kid Rock and Fred Durst are, their shows don’t all end in sexual assaults and fires.
You pull any of the variables out, and the outcome is much different.
Can’t be surprised when the fan base of an idiot gets stirred up when the idiot stirs them up.
I feel pretty confident being right in any argument where I’m on the side of calling Kid Rock a moron.
The organizers should have known what they were getting with ICP, Limp Bizkit, Kid Rock types - its no secret. Like booking Phish and being offended by the odour.
In defense of Woodstock '99 - at least none of the acts almost got electrocuted to death!
The organizers should have known what they were getting with ICP, Limp Bizkit, Kid Rock types - its no secret. Like booking Phish and being offended by the odour.
In defense of Woodstock '99 - at least none of the acts almost got electrocuted to death!
I'm definitely not blaming the artists for the outcomes, though being a dip shit is certainly blame worthy on a more universal scale.
The blame definitely lies with the promoters and organizers.
Hey man, leave the kids alone. I've had enough of the frenzied demonization of young people surrounding Woodstock '99. Yes, Woodstock was filled with predators: the degenerate idiots who assaulted those women, the greedy promoters who wrung every cent out of thirsty concertgoers, and last but not least, the predator media that turned a blind eye to real violence and scapegoated the quarter of a million music fans at Woodstock '99, the vast majority of whom had the time of their lives.
Is Kid Rock a piece of shit? Yeah probably, but he's just a symptom of the disease, not the disease itself. It was blowback and something we see ratcheted up 1000 today. Music becomes popular just tends to be a reflection of what people want, not the artists themselves (although for the most part, it takes talent to get to that point).
The documentary does get a couple of things right, that these issues are much harder to solve than the symptoms, so the symptoms get demonized. Also, people in large groups are going to be susceptible to the mob mentality and are going to do things completely out of character (or at least extremely exaggerated). This we know is backed by solid science.
Is that true? The Ringer did an eight hour podcast on Woodstock '99? I wouldn't listen to an eight hour podcast on the original Woodstock, much less than the one in '99.
Same with Limp Bizkit and their shenanigans. Pretty interesting window to grow up during, I'd say.
Durst and his band make a very convenient scapegoat. Virtually no one will admit to being a fan of theirs anymore. Durst has been an object of ridicule for quite a while now. So, you can hurl pretty any accusation at them.
In my view there are two elements of responsibility — the organizers and acts who set the stage, and the individual idiots in the crowd who did things on a spectrum from irresponsible to reprehensible.
I completely believe the accounts from the organizers they asked a number of performers, including Durst and Kid Rock to chill out because security wasn’t keeping up, and instead they acted like dicks.
I don't find Woodstock 99 to be that culturally significant, it was Fyre Fest with major corporate sponsors and MTV.
I don't find Woodstock 99 to be that culturally significant, it was Fyre Fest with major corporate sponsors and MTV.
That's a really stupid thesis then - Woodstock '99 was a blip. I think I can remember one cultural reference to it ever - a Simpsons joke where Otto says he met his fiancee during "the summer of love - Woodstock '99" amidst a flashback of fires and rampaging mobs.
That's it. Can't think of another one. It happened, it was a story for a little while afterward, and then it was largely forgotten.
He isn't the greatest musician, which he admits -- but he is a frontman and someone who has a natural penchant for being an entertainer. He surrounded himself with great musicians (whether you love or hate Limp Bizkit, Wes Borland is an incredible guitarist) and basically was going to find a way to make himself famous within the entertainment industry one way or the other.
He played the game.
Having said that, he absolutely can still be a huge dick at times and went through a massive streak of being a bully in the late 90s before it all fell apart for Limp Bizkit's mainstream popularity in the early 00s, as nu metal faded and pop punk/emo + 2001 revival bands started taking over the (admittedly shrinking) spotlight that rock music occupied in public consciousness
I’m definitely working out some feelings of hate for Kid Rock I didn’t know were in there!
I hated Limp Bizkit so very much in those days, but the piling on it they have received over Woodstock makes me much more sympathetic. As far as aggressive bands and onstage antics go, I watched Rage set fire to an American flag on stage. That's kind of incendiary, no? And they certainly didn't play mellow music. Yet they escape blame because their politics are more to the liking of music journalists, compared to the easily scapegoated meatheads of Limp Bizkit.
The more we talk about it, the sillier this stupid documentary sounds.
I always got the impression that those Southern California punk rock (or whatever) bands were of the same nature.
I think a lot of these celebrity musicians don't live or have the background they lead on.
I always got the impression that those Southern California punk rock (or whatever) bands were of the same nature.
I think a lot of these celebrity musicians don't live or have the background they lead on.
Yeh this weird idea we have in this country that individual success is built from pure talent and hard work is a weird one. The only thing you see that is in sports, essentially every other career is built based on the success of the prior generation of parents, especially something like music. It’s massively disproportional the amount of well known artists that came from privileged backgrounds.
RIP Ass Dan - ( New Window )
The weather, the tents, the cost of water, the acts, and the promoters didn't make anyone do anything.
But history is littered with examples of people doing things they otherwise wouldn't given the right circumstances and the right encouragement.
I think it's worth wondering if:
1) staging an event with poor facilities in the heat
2) not providing adequate security
3) booking acts who create a market for stupidity or worse
4) booking acts who create a market for rebellion or worse
5) not dialing down the antagonizing when it was clear security was failing
contribute to individuals making bad decisions.
I always got the impression that those Southern California punk rock (or whatever) bands were of the same nature.
I think a lot of these celebrity musicians don't live or have the background they lead on.
Maybe Dr. Dexter Holland - the singer/lead guitarist from the Offspring?
He was his class valedictorian, full ride to USC and now has a doctorate in molecular biology.
doesn't mean he can't be a punk rocker. Angst is angst. right?
the Clash, specifically Joe Strummer, struggled with this concept as the band became more successful. Strummer did not have a wealthy upbringing but was solidly middle class, not exactly oppressed/etc.
I think that guitarist from Green Day (Mike Dirnt) is just a big snob with tattoos who plays pop punk rock.
I think that guitarist from Green Day (Mike Dirnt) is just a big snob with tattoos who plays pop punk rock.
Its a performance. Tom Waits isn't an alcoholic living in a flophouse - doesn't detract from the persona or the performance.
Sure but the whole image/scene of punk rock is sleeping in a British apartment with 16 people on the floor, not some rich boy in California talking about the system and ... You know. They're posers lol
Sorry I just read a lot of Vice magazine back in the day. Ha.
Mick Jones didn't have much of a different upbringing than Strummer other than being a non-practicing (I think) jew and dealing with the oppression of that in London .
yet they could preach all day about "the man" and had credibility.
Unless you grew up like Sid Vicious you're probably not writing/singing from experience.
I think the poser angle is more relevant in hip hop or rap than punk.