Where have all the protest songs gone?


In light of all the problems the world faces today it occured to me that no one in the folk scene or heaven forbid the rock world are writing songs about war,famine,and you can fill in whatever ills you please into the garbage heap.Has the music arts become so safe and sterile and corporate that no one can hear their still small voice and raise it?
brucegel

Showing 3 responses by lugnut

U2 seems to have an opinion about everything. It'll come out shortly. Maybe Alec Baldwin will cut a few tracks.
Brucegel,

I believe your attack on Avideo was unfounded. He didn't state MEANINGFUL discourse; his post said discourse. Meaningful is in the eye/ear of the beholder. You have given some insight into what you consider to be "meaningful" with an earlier post referring to "PBS, Bill Moyers and Ralph Nader". Let's just say I don't hold the aforementioned in high esteem. You are entitled to your opinion and I, mine.

Having lived through the 60's and experienced the anti-war movement first hand I can only speak from personal experience. Others may have been different from mine but my experiences were real. The majority of the protest participants were taking part in an activity that I found was social. Most of them didn't work, being students or simply unemployed hippies. It proved to be a great place to meet chicks and later get laid. Those I knew personally that participated weren't informed on the issues. It was simply the thing to do at the time.

Protest songs are a lot like my experiences above. There were only a handful of thoughtful, legitimate protest songwriters, IMHO. The remainder were just trying to further their carriers and get laid. I wish that we would get our meaningful discourse through dialogue with each other in a civilized fashion. This isn't going to happen in these forums. Every time something like this comes up in the forums there ends up being several "your mother wears army boots" snippets and it's downhill from there.

I don't really care what kinds of opinions an artist has. They may be great singers/musicians/artists but that shouldn't be a reason the accept their opinions as correct. Some artists earn my respect even if I disagree with their position. Bono of U2 is such an example. He puts his money and his energies where his mouth is. I respect that. My respect stops for him when he proposes government reaching into my pocket to fund his desires.

The civil rights movement would have run its course with or without a single note being written about the cause.

I've contributed several times in the Audiogon forums in defense of an unfair attack on Bush. Does that mean I'm a Republican that blindly follows his lead? Nope. I can't stand what he and Ashcroft are doing to my Constitution. My fellow Americans aren't the enemy here and the changes that both parties are responsible for aren't about our protection. It's about control. We need to face the fact that we citizens have no friends in government. That's a fact, Jack.

Patrick
Brucegel,

I have no problem agreeing to disagree. This phenomenon of art being a prime mover, or galvanizing force, behind social change just isn't supported historically. Prior to Woody Guthrie's dust bowl commentaries through song, art and music was created after the fact to record what happened. What you are describing is a phenomenon that has occured only after the advent of the broadcast medium. It is an illusion that the likes of Bob Dylan, Pete Seger, Peter, Paul & Mary, and others somehow pushed society over the top on any one issue.

I'm moved by lyrics that express the human condition. Being moved in such a way has never influenced me to the point of taking to the streets though. I arrive at that point through a process of discovery aided by a sound knowledge of history, absorbtion of scholarly writings and a sense of right and wrong instilled in me by my father.

As a pretty good example of what I speak, consider the founding of this country. The signers of the Declaration of Indepenence arrived at that point through dialogue, historical consideration and an firm knowledge of right and wrong. The U.S. Constitution was written about at great length through the exchange of letters written by the framers of that document. At the Constitutional Convention the participants may have had different views of the purpose and structure of government but they certainly debated the issues to form a concensus; all without benefit of a song.

God Bless America, The Star Spangled Banner and America The Beautiful were all written after the fact. I'm just really trying to argue that most of the people at the time of the civil rights movement and the Vietnam war weren't tuned into the songs that so moved you. They were moved by the printed word and a sense of right and wrong. Our generation wasn't the only generation involved in making these changes and the other folks were getting their motivation from sources other than song.

I would hate to think that a people couldn't make necessary change without aid of three stanza's and a chorus.

Patrick