Will Gen X create a new musical generation gap?

Aug 18 22:04 UTC 1997

There has been quite a lot of talk about how Generation X and the baby boomers
seem to be lacking somewhat of a generational gap musically, or that the two
generations were comfortable with listening to each other's music.  Compared
with the gap the boomers faced with their parents, any Gen X/boomer gap seems
relatively small by comparison.  Contemporary rock and folk bands have turned
to the sounds of the 60's and 70's, and new Beatles fans are comparing notes
with their parents.

But yet I sense there is a schism yet to come.  The garage band sound, in my
opinion, was the dregs of 60's and 70's music.  When Tom Hanks made _That
Thing You Do_, he had to get all the Gen X extras to learn how to shimmy
instead of headbang when they danced to the music.  And then their was the
challenge of figuring out how to cover up their tattoos, which most of the
earlier generation didn't have.  The new Beatle craze has had a very different
edge to it-- it took off with the release of the Anthology.  The tracks, as
you remember, were lacking in studio polish, most being demo or unreleased
versions.  This has seemed to fit in with current tastes of raw, no-frills,
and simpler music.

For every band dipping into the sounds of the earlier generation, I see
several more bands trying to pull away.  (I don't mind retro in general, save
I really wish retro-1979 would just keel over and die quickly.)  Anyone else
agree, or can you share insight on this?

response 2 of 25:

Aug 19 06:16 UTC 1997

Strangely, however, I feel a part of that rift.  I just can't tap into that
raw anger the current young generation seems so enamored with.  I consider
myself part of the first wave of Gen X for that very reason.  I like the
earlier moody sound-- Depeche Mode, The Smiths, The Cure, etc.  Of course,
I still like a little of today's music, but I find myself more and more
alienated from the current stuff.  Must be the manic-depression :P

response 4 of 25:

Aug 19 21:30 UTC 1997

For that matter, *I* can't stand some of said hard hitting angstified music.
I don't think the gap is that clear - Jimi Hendrix was a lot harder than some
of today's music, just as NIN is much harder than the Beatles were.

response 6 of 25:

Aug 20 00:27 UTC 1997

Parental comment here (well, I guess *someone's* gotta do the token
parent/Boomer in this item!) -- I haven't had a lot of problems with
a generation gap yet, though it still ticks me off that Gareth doesn't
like Def Leppard. :-) Rhiannon seems to be quite happy listening to
whatever we do, although she does tend to drift into Japanese anime
soundtracks and Spice Girls. Gareth is starting to be much more into
alternative (?) -- things like Prodigy and Third Eye Blind, etc. So
far I haven't keeled over in disgust with anything he's liked. He and
I will often listen to the radio together, with "his" station on.

response 8 of 25:

Aug 20 01:45 UTC 1997

To be honest, my gap is the fact that I am a *lot* more into music, and a
serious study of it, than my parents are.

response 10 of 25:

Aug 21 02:01 UTC 1997

You make a good point, Steve.

response 12 of 25:

Aug 23 06:22 UTC 1997

I think the number of people in that category is growing, however-- 'tis a
problem that has ebbed and flowed for decades, I'm sure.

response 14 of 25:

Aug 24 23:30 UTC 1997

People still do recognize the existence of disconnected kids. Problem is,
how does anyone re-conncet them, or forge connections that weren't there
in the first place? Hard questions, all.


As to the generation gap in music, I saw one forming today -- Gareth
went to the music store on the corner of Stae and Liberty to get a
CD single -- and he very carefully didn't get the two that "Dad would hate",
nor did he get the Prodigy one he wanted since he laready knew Dad thought
Prodigy is disgusting.

response 16 of 25:

Jul 11 18:36 UTC 1998

There definately is a large generation gap musically, even now. Most of it
lies in the electronic mosic of the rave scene. I have frequently heard my
parents telling me that the music I listen to (Drum 'n Bass, Hardcore) is
noise.

response 18 of 25:

Jul 29 15:38 UTC 1998

Well, this is an interesting item.  Alow me to put in my 2 cents.  Over the
past few weeks, while on vacation, I found I was stuck in out car with my Dad
and a fixed amount of music we had brought along with us (everything on the
radio would be country, which neither of us care for).  Now, pretty much up
untill this trip I had assumed that all my parents liked was classical,
because, well, that's all they listened to, although I had learned that they
liked Beatles music.  
        I was somewhat anxious about playing my music around them, because I
really hate to play something that they don't care for.  I did end up playing
a lot of my stuff, to find that my parents (my dad in particular.  My mom
tends to classify a lot of rock music as "Thump thump...") actually liked a
lot of it, including Phish, Erick Clapton, and Blue Oyster Cult.  What they
didn't actually like, I found, they at least didn't mind, like my Black 47
CDs. 
        I don't know what this might say about a generation gap or not, because
most of my prefered music is definately older music.  Its not that I don't
care for todays music, I just don't buy it -<Smile>-.  Anyway, thats my
experience.

response 20 of 25:

Aug 2 12:28 UTC 1998

I recall some quote about how the last decade of a century consists of
everything that happened in the rest of the century.  Seems to fit.

response 22 of 25:

Dec 1 18:22 UTC 1998

I've been told that some historians have noted that trends of the century
begin to be repeated towards the final decades.  I'm not sure if this is true
or not, but the increased awareness of recycling has seemed to define this
decade.

Musicologists and critics of pop music have noted that not many new formulas
have come out.  They compare the sounds and feel of recent acts to popular
artists of the past and suggest that there are significantly similar aspects
between them.  In other words, we're repeating the ideas of the past
generation.  Although interpretations may be slightly different, the material
is basically the same.

I knew the Beatles were rapidly gaining popularity with Generation Xers for
quite a while as I noticed that it wasn't just the hippie children that were
listening to them, and that their early material was very popular for a while,
which had virtually no connection to the hippies.  This was quite a while
before the Anthology came out.

However, I think it was a stroke of marketing genius for the producers to make
such an anthology-- an anthology of popular songs without the studio polish,
and some tunes that had not been heard before.  A few songs were drastically
different; the original concept had been changed.  For example, I found the
original cut of "Sgt. Pepper's" to be absolutely dreadful, but that was the
character originally intended-- Paul McCartney was inspired by the hillbilly
peddlers with the all-natural snake-oil tonics.  It was supposed to sound
earthy and homey, as he explained in the video portion.

The critics thought the Anthology was pitiful at times, as it clearly showed
them as struggling studio musicians in the first few volumes.  It showed much
of the process involved in recording; many mistakes and bloopers were
incorporated.  But that was probably why it became so successful-- this was
a side of the Beatles the new generation hadn't heard before.   Having the
Beatles portrayed in a more realistic light probably endeared them more to
us, as many have grown tired of studio wizardry.  Indeed, many recent acts
have been void of that polish, and a rawer Beatles sound was probably fresher
in that light.  In fact, some songs, particularly some of George Harrison's
tunes, sounded lovely as acoustic guitar versions.  (Note: but this too has
been popular with the boomers as well.)

It's interesting you should mention Paul Simon, Katy.  He's one of the
artists of the boomer era that has had incredible staying power.  I think that
may be why there is sometimes not much of a generational gap with some
people-- artists of the boomer era have endured long enough to stay popular,
and/or profoundly influence the artists of the next generation-- our
generation.  Joni Mitchell is another artist that comes to mind.

I suppose we could debate if the Rolling Stones fit into that category later.

response 24 of 25:

Dec 6 04:33 UTC 1998

I'd honestly rather not have to see a return of the clothes of the Eighties.
<Shudder>