The Sunday Hangover with Warren Ellis

I think this is a very good point. In the art (fashion/music/design) world it seems like the "alt" culture has been defined, packaged, and sold as such; in essence mainstreaming a particular style but marketing it as alternative/underground/indie. I would even venture to say that the "alternative style" has never been so popular. It reminds me of the "modern style" at the turn of the last century, which took decades for the public to embrace, only after it was made marketable to a wider audience. Now the modern style of architecture/design/fashion is embraced and revered.

This also begs the question, is it such a bad thing? On the one hand, we all like to hold on to the idea that alternative & underground creations are unique, exclusive, and special (not completely unlike the products "luxury brands" try to sell). On the other hand, if these ideas and creations are indeed so great, shouldn't we be content with the prospect of mainstreaming them?

Don't get me wrong, I think creativity must move forward, not backwards. Like most things, creative ideas must start out small/alternative/underground. Maybe there is a lack of this alternative creativity happening today, but then again...maybe it's in the works and just hasn't made it mainstream yet. Maybe the new alternative culture is so different that it won't look anything like it's predecessor. Let's hope anyway.

I've been thinking along these lines for a while now, but I never had a word for it. Now I do: anachronesis.

In some ways it's comforting to know that, as someone who is older than many on this site, I can still relate to contemporary culture, because the vast majority of it was formed when I was of age. Punk? Rap? Gangsta culture? Been there, done that, still have a Flava Flav t-shirt from the 1980's.

But its creepy to me that so little that is new has been created as compared to what has been recycled. Especially because what is recycled are the visual and audio cues from the past, not the actual emotions or beliefs.

I suppose that's why I'm here, because sometimes I get cued into something that you can't find in the mainstream or its many manufactured tributaries.

Too much to say...

First, maybe you'd find something different culturally if you stopped googling "alt culture" and went outside to see what was happening in reality. I see new and interesting shit everyday that of course no one has heard of or is writing abut etc.

Saying something is dead is so lame and is never true. It usually is just the beginning of something new. As a jazz musician, when jazz left the mainstream (ie BeBop and beyond) it started to really get interesting, because they just didn't give a fuck what people thought anymore.

All culture refrences the past. Just because you are educated enough to see of hear all the refrences in something doesn't make it an "anachronesis". Who are the White Stripes ripping off? Some bands from the 60's and 70's who were in turn ripping off blues musicians from the 20's etc. But I think everyone can tell the difference between the Rolling Stones and Muddy Waters.

People have been crying about the corporatization of art since as long as I can remember. I'd say it's easier now to get you stuff out there without the help of major media than ever, perhaps to a fault. I will concede that corporations have become more savvy to marketing "hipness" and making you think you are going against the grain while in fact you are still sucking from the same monoconglomorate teet.

Two things killed alternative culture. The internet, and the corporatization of punk. In other words, alt cult's been dead since 1992.

I don't think that foreign film falls into the "alternative" category. If you think about alternative in general, it's a subtext of things that are enjoyed beneath the surface, in the "underground", and which we hope never bubble up to the surface. That's why it's "alternative." But foreign film has always been something that everyone has tried desperately (even in other countries - think Kung Fu Hustle) to mainstream.

"All culture refrences the past. Just because you are educated enough to see of hear all the refrences in something doesn't make it an "anachronesis"."

No. But making something that's ALL references IS. I mean, the only way you can read that piece your way is if you decided from the start that you're being attacked.

Mind you, if you're a jazz musician, I guess that's a fair assumption to make...

-- W

great thinking, warren. ive been wondering about this for the last few years, but you put a conclusion on that makes sense.

and it is disgusting to make new things that is over 50 percent reference. we used to call that plagerism, now we just call it family guy.

Pretty accurate assessment, I think.
Of course, it's not all bad...

/Begin self-important opinion

Perhaps the fault lies less with the distributors of such crap, and more with artist unwilling to evolve...

We are so hyped up on being "independent" that we lose sight of being ourselves, and our art tends to reflect this. I have no solution to propose here... I don't think anyone does, but in the end it doesn't really matter. If the great artist of the past, had devoted this much time to the "relevance" of their works, or the importance of their "artistic movement" we would probably still be drawing on cave walls and pretentiously bitching about the importance of our work...

/End self-important opinion ... prepare for backlash

Don't we have to know where we've been to know where we're going? Or is that just a fruitless proverb?

I'm influenced by all kinds of bands, movies, books and art and I think I do a damn fine job taking what I like and shaping it into my own.

As for the mainstream, they are generally not so curious about what we're up to. By the time they find out, we've long since abandoned it.

Maybe we should really figure out a way to light a fire under their asses. Get them to be curious. I don't mind ideas being mainstream so long as they're good ideas.

Oh, and welcome back!

"Don't we have to know where we've been to know where we're going? "

Of course. Re-enacting where we've been is something else entirely, surely?

Shirley

I suppose I just look at what passes for alternative culture today as walking/talking reminders of where we've been. So perhaps there is at least some kind of benefit. (Althogh, Goths today are much different than they were in the 3rd century)

It's people that don't limit themselves to a sub-culture that usually end up creating the new ones, anyways.

I think that in itself is both a sign that the "alt culture" still exists and is still creating. It's certainly not in the same form with the same styles as the punk rock days. "alt culture" is now a style that is part of the mainstream. Grunge can be bought at Target, Punk Rock at Burberry. The new alternative culture has its own name and own style, which we probably don't even really recognize becase we're sitting in the middle of it.

Agreed. I mean, who are the people actually listening to bands like Simple Plan? They're not me, or people who exist in "my" subculture (whatever that might be) and I bet most people who are posting to this site aren't listening either (and I consider this site fairly mainstream, though I obviously don't care too much since I'm still here and still enjoy the people here). However, they're a kind of band who certainly tries to capture that "alt" image. I'm sure many people would assume it's all the same thing. Where to me it's very clear how different it is.

Maybe that's an example that's not totally applicable but it should give you an idea of what I'm trying to say.

Personally, I've never really tried to fit into any subculture, I've let things influence me, and developed my own style from there. It probably is pretty close to the styles of other people, and therefore we're likely going to be into the same things since we're influenced by the same things. That's fine. I don't really like to think about how this affecting any subculture. I'm just being me, as cliched as it may sound.

I would say telling you that you don't know what you are talking about is more offensive than defensive.

I think I just don't have my finger on the mainstream pulse, or the alt culture pulse to even know what it is that you seem to think sucks so bad. I guess I should be grateful.

I've heard of a lot of stereotypes about jazz musicians before, but defensive is definitely new...

The future was better when we could forget the past.