Bob Dylan has been awared a Nobel prize.

[cc]

pretty clever



for a roo fooker



 ac_smile

[GORDY GAMBINO]

And heres me sayen oh sorry anyone can get the wrong hole



or whoops I slipped

[Bricktop]

WTF has this to do with Dylan's Nobel prize???

Absolutely Nothing. But how much more is there to say on such a thing?

Well, I know that its a distraction for the far more compelling discussions on extremism (yawn) or islam (yawn).



However, being given the Nobel prize, it implies that Dylan had a profound and lasting impact on the world as we know it, and even now shapes YOUR attitude and behaviour, thoughts and persective.



Music, circa 1960 to 1980 had a lasting and indelible impact on society and our culture, particularly in the West. Music became the blitzkreig of a generation that demanded change from the status quo; imperialism, conformity, total subjugation to government and its bureaucracy, and obesiance.



Who you are now, what you believe, how you articulate those beliefs and why can all be in some way attributed to the impact of popular music of that period.



Thus, does the absence of a popular cultural movement in the modern age make us weaker and more vulnerable to Government excess?

[Twenty Dollars]

Well, the entire Nobel thing is a ultra-prog heaven crapper .. a bunch of inbred elitist dolts  ... dolts, with  serious  agenda similar to the EU govt. and UN  inbred elitist dolts.



They chose people based on what serves their agenda ... an agenda that is light years away  from the minds yer regular folk who actually do real things and  make the real world run

This post proves you are a Zionist.

Ha. I'm stoked he received the reward. Nothing more.

[Anonymous]

WTF has this to do with Dylan's Nobel prize???

Absolutely Nothing. But how much more is there to say on such a thing?

Well, I know that its a distraction for the far more compelling discussions on extremism (yawn) or islam (yawn).



However, being given the Nobel prize, it implies that Dylan had a profound and lasting impact on the world as we know it, and even now shapes YOUR attitude and behaviour, thoughts and persective.



Music, circa 1960 to 1980 had a lasting and indelible impact on society and our culture, particularly in the West. Music became the blitzkreig of a generation that demanded change from the status quo; imperialism, conformity, total subjugation to government and its bureaucracy, and obesiance.



Who you are now, what you believe, how you articulate those beliefs and why can all be in some way attributed to the impact of popular music of that period.



Thus, does the absence of a popular cultural movement in the modern age make us weaker and more vulnerable to Government excess?

There is no popular cultural movement today?



There are plenty of artists who would disagree with you..



But, anyway the change of that era came before the artist..



The artists merely capitalized on the winds of change and therefore not deserving of credit for the movement of that time.

[Bricktop]

There is always popular culture. Always has been, always will be. Totalitarian states even use it to their advantage by censorship and imposing strict guidelines.



However, the movement of the 60's, driven by music, was a profound and momentous turn in human cultural history. Perhaps unique, even.



It was driven by the youth of the West. People under thirty need not have applied. It was a counter-culture event, in that it challenged the prevailing cultural standards, such as fashion, language, conformity and obeisance, and freedom of speech. However, it was the first time in human history that the spear tip was popular music driven by working class performers and supported by youth all over the world.



Cultural movement in this era seems more entrenched in technology. Facebook, Playstation, Twitter, global television networks and of course a level of communication never before experienced.



In 1968, to say you were a big supporter of Apple implied that you were a Beatles fan. Now it defines your phone and technological preference.

[JOE]

I still think the Nobel committee erred by awarding the Nobel Prize to Bob Dylan, Leopardsocks. Outside of his music poetry, Bob Dylan has not produced a notable literary work. He should not be considered as a serious author.



Perhaps Nobel should create another category under popular entertainment. This would not diminish the significance of the award, but place the recipient in a category where they more appropriately belong.

[Anonymous]

There is always popular culture. Always has been, always will be. Totalitarian states even use it to their advantage by censorship and imposing strict guidelines.



However, the movement of the 60's, driven by music, was a profound and momentous turn in human cultural history. Perhaps unique, even.



It was driven by the youth of the West. People under thirty need not have applied. It was a counter-culture event, in that it challenged the prevailing cultural standards, such as fashion, language, conformity and obeisance, and freedom of speech. However, it was the first time in human history that the spear tip was popular music driven by working class performers and supported by youth all over the world.



Cultural movement in this era seems more entrenched in technology. Facebook, Playstation, Twitter, global television networks and of course a level of communication never before experienced.



In 1968, to say you were a big supporter of Apple implied that you were a Beatles fan. Now it defines your phone and technological preference.

Totalitarian states decide who the popular artists will be..



The music of the sixties reflected the changing culture of the time.

[Bricktop]

No, I disagree with respect.



And I was THERE, Fash.



The music was the driving force.

[GORDY GAMBINO]

No drugs was.

[JOE]

No, I disagree with respect.



And I was THERE, Fash.



The music was the driving force.

Well, she's partially right, LS.

In fact I'd say she's mostly right.

Actually, all those new musical sounds which appeared in the late 60s early 70s owe much of their success to technology and the electronic medium. Otherwise thered haved been no Jimi Hendrix, acid rock, stairway to heaven, dark side of the moon or woodstock.



Thanks to nikola tesla and his alternating current machines disguised as electronic guitars and instruments. He was light years ahead of his time and his genius a half a century before would make possuble and spawn the rock music revoltion

[Bricktop]

We're talking culture, Joe, not technology.



There is a substantial difference.

[Anonymous]

But, anyway the change of that era came before the artist..



The artists merely capitalized on the winds of change and therefore not deserving of credit for the movement of that time.

I haven't give it much thought, but of course there would have been copycats for sure who jumped on the counter culture bandwagon.

[JOE]

We're talking culture, Joe, not technology.



There is a substantial difference.

Music was prominent around that time and influenced the youth of that era. The expression of the Youth gained precdedence while the wisdom of elders was supplanted. The social hierarchical pyramid became inverted, turned upside down



But the music was also influenced by external factors as well. Technology being one of them. 4 guys on a stage playing before 100,000 people or more replaced Tommy Dorsey's Big Band of 40 musicians playing in a confined radio studio of your father's time just 20 years before.



And not all the performers came from working class backgrounds. The Beatles certainly did, but Mick Jagger was from a well off family and he attended the London School of Economics. Jim Morrison of the Doors came from an established military family & his dad was an Admiral in the US Navy. So some were evidently the kids of privilege.

[Bricktop]

True enough...but the popularity of the music was very much focussed on working class people.



It was anti-cultural, in the sense that it overturned the conventions of the previous generations; opera, classic, middle of the road crooners. Pop music was a working class phenomenon in its early days, despite some of its purveyors being "posh" as you have stated. Jagger may have come from a upper class background, but the Stones were regarded as unrefined, scruffy and repulsive to that class.



Playing live was not reliant on technology. Musicians have been doing live gigs for thousands of years. Amplified music was not an innovation of the 60's. Vocalists had been using microphones and PA systems for decades.



What tore the heart out of the established musical scene was guitars as the primary instrument. Guitars could be played loud and were limited only by the power of the amplifiers. Neither of these items were new. But guitar players developed louder and wilder techniques. Brass and strings were largely abandoned, especially for live events, and volume was the new god.