It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


How can you make a point?

page: 1

log in


posted on Dec, 20 2005 @ 10:35 PM
How would you rebel through music, since words can only do so much. I was just wondering, and you guys have so many different points of view, I wanna know. Just tell me what you think, thanks.

[edit on 12/20/05 by bsbfan1]

posted on Dec, 22 2005 @ 09:26 PM
Words can only do so much, yes - actions are what really make a difference - but words can influence others. I mean, think of it. With 26 characters and a few assorted bits of punctuation, you can describe just about anything. It's remarkable.

posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 02:08 PM
The whole point is the same as books, movies and so on and so fourth.

To get their point out their and to get people to think about it...all Karl Marx did was write a book, millions of people died because of those books and so on and so fourth.

A lot has changed due to music, people just do not see it but look at Live8 as an example of what music can do for people.

posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 02:20 PM
My life's always been influenced by music, directly and indirectly. If nothing else, my actions are influenced by my mood, and music has always (for me at least) been better than any chemical at altering my mood. But a good songwriter--Lennon and Dylan come to mind off hand, but there's definitely countless others--can put things in a different light you never would have seen. Unfortunately, this day and age everyone's more focused on making a buck, which means songs are more commonly about sex, drugs, or violence than making a political, psychological, or social statement of any kind.

posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 02:31 PM
MCory1, that's not strictly true.

Music is a reflection of society, to argue Lennon and Dylan do not speak about drugs in fact many of them were on more drugs than these people think about. However, look at the shift in music [especailly rap] since the War on Terror.

The sad part is, the fact many of these artists can rap about drugs, violence and so on and so fourth and people can listen to the music...because that is what they experience. If they didn't see it happening, they would not listen they would hold no audiance and worst still is why companies are willing to promote this as a positive thing.

Many of the Rap Artists, when you listen to an interview do not intend the songs to be positive but rather a reflection of what they see. It is then the company which decides the video and "image". [Why I never try to get signed or even send my music to companies.]

posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 02:39 PM
Point taken; I had forgotten that fact. Also, drugs have taken on a different light since the 60's, and that should be taken into consideration as well. Even though they weren't exactly handed out by church groups back then, drugs have become much more demonized since.

I think my primary mistake was in generalizing the whole commercialization of music into pop-culture. I know that back in the "early years" of rock, there were still boy bands and the equivalents of the modern day Brittany Spears, but maybe it was just that it seems more innocent compared to modern commercialization to me. And I'm sure there's a couple modern day Lennons with their own "Imagine" that will be remembered in the same light 20 years from now. When the TV and radio force feed you all the garbage that's only designed to sell though, it's hard to not clump everything together.

posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 02:48 PM
I think the difference from the Lennon days and today is a big and obvious one. Lennon wrote his songs and acted on them. He stood for something and proved it. Musicians today speak alot of crap, they are richer than ever and do nothing to back up the words they speak. Lennon was who he was because his listeners realized he was not trying to just make money, he was trying to make a point

Today they are using cheap tactics to make money and sell records. I don't think they believe what they are saying anymore. These punk rockers that talk about how bad life was, and how they were made fun of all their life, Boo hoo! Go wipe your ass with your money and shut up already.

Guys like Lennon did not portray themself as victims, they spoke of peace and took action on it. Im sick of listening to rich kids victimizing themselves.

While they make their millions and talk about changing the world, the majority of them do nothing. To make a point, its more about actions rather then just words. Anyone can say they'll change the world, very few attempt it.

posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 02:52 PM
Amen chissler--you just said everything I was trying to say, and much better than I could have if I new how to get it out right.

You have voted chissler for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have two more votes this month.

You get my first WATS for 2006

posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 02:57 PM
chissler, it's not musicians who go about promoting their music it is the company and what you say is a massive generalisation.

Many musicians still today stand by what they say and try to make change. To argue that back in the 1960's popular musicians didn't act like some today is wrong and naive, many said one thing and were happy with the money the difference is...they are not remembered as the "Greats" and they won't be in the future.

This is why people remember Lennon, over the others who existed and said the same thing but didn't live by it and it is why people 50 years from now won't remember many of the "Pop" bands. They will fade out because of the hypocricy.

[edit on 9/1/2006 by Odium]

posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 03:07 PM
MCory... Thank you!

I realize the massive generalization I made, and truth to be told, I intenionally ignored it.

I realize this is not the truth with everyone, however I just feel everything is about making money these days rather than actually making the point. I mean with all the bands today writing songs bashing the war in Iraq. How many do you actually think stand for it, or how many are trying to make a dollar? When they are not writing these songs, are they out doing anything to stop this war? I highly doubt it. Their are the exception, as their is for everything but I think this generation is missing the guys that are really out their making a difference.

When you put a song on to really be inspired, one that really hits home with you. Is it something new? I know any song that hits home for me is from an older generation. Where the lyrics did not stand by themselves.

posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 03:13 PM
chissler, the thing is I work in a music story and have to listen to this music.

Out of the whole store, I can think of two commercial bands/artists who are openly against the war. System of a Down and Kanye West that is it out of the hundreds of others and I doubt they even make 1%. Look at what Sony have said to people like Immortal Technique or Paris. Paris was offered major record deals, if he cut the politics out and here he is still saying what he said before.

Then look at the 1960's, again there are people who said one thing and didn't do anything and those who said it and did it. This is the same as now, the problem is people just can't reflect back on it properly because nobody likes a hypocrit.

posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 03:14 PM

Originally posted by Odium
chissler, it's not musicians who go about promoting their music it is the company and what you say is a massive generalisation.

I agree with the rest of your post, but I do want to make a statement about this comment. To put all of the blame on the labels and not the musicians is almost like saying the SS officers were okay because they were "just following orders." (Yeah, I know that's a bit of an extreme example, but it's all I could think of.) It's still their music, their performances, their lyrics. They should take some of the blame for not standing up for what they believe in.

posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 05:19 PM
Does that not prove my point even more? The bands are willing to put their name on some garbage they do not even agree with, because it is what the label wants. How stupid is that, we dont agree with what were saying and we dont like it.. but thats because we didnt say it. We got paid though!!!

Look at a guy like Kurt Cobain. Drugs got the best of him, but he was not in it for the money. He wrote songs that meant something to him, and it meant something to those who listened. He did not want fame and fortune, he just wanted to Make a Point

posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 05:28 PM

What happens is, they get screwed. Have either of you seen one of these contracts? Normally, they sign them into a deal making them have to produce X amount of albums. If they do not they have to pay the costs of what that could earn. They also sign over much of the rights, so although they did have a say before they no longer do.

The company markets them, and normally removes the main idea behind the music. RATM are a fantastic example of this, along with groups like Pantera - they had to fulfill their record deals, so they made worthless albums.

This is what happens, when you get teenagers and people in their early 20's and keep on hounding them about the money. Little do they know that the "band" they once were a part of, no longer belongs to them but the company and it is why so many bands now have "Ghost Writers" after the first album and why many more won't get signed.

If you tell someone you will give them £5million for three albums, most of them will do it - especailly if they live in areas where people get shot for a pair of shoes. The only thing they can write about is what they know and what they are interested in, which reflects on what they have experiences and then the company markets them in a set way. You can see this now with companies setting up these "Rap feuds" and then the "members" becoming "friends again". It's a boost in sales and that is all...

These people go along with it or have to pay that £5million back.

posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 08:00 PM
No they are screwing themselves. If they are willing to put material out their that they dont believe in, then shame on them. Music should be an extension of your soul, those lucky enough to have this talent should not let it go to waste by conforming to some capitalists thoughts of what will sell. This is the problem with the industry, we have 100 bands that all look the same, sound the same and are all preaching the same crap.

Good Charlotte, bad boy punk band with lyrics like... girls dont like boys, girls like cars and money. You bad @$$es!! I mean you look at these guys and this is not them talking. They were probably told to aim for the younger crowd and need to accomodate with certain lyrics. Mean while they spend their career gritting their teeth.

This is why so little action is taken anymore, because they aren't writing what they want. The only guys that can do what they want are those who begin their own label. So I do agree to disagree here.

posted on Jan, 9 2006 @ 09:19 PM
I also voted for you chrissler for the Way Above thing. That was beautiful and so true, and another reason I hardly ever listen to punk and rock music(nothing against the older artists). Thanks. You guys have gave some good ideas, and they're greatly appreciated. But I think reguardless of your job you should "stand against something or for something", not just be a "zombie" pawn of the powerful, rich, lazy, and crazy. I just don't like how they keep trying to depress people through the TV and Music these days to keep some sort of status quo, especially since the "vid rigging" on TRL is wrost than EVER. Even when BSB was popular it wasn't this bad.

I just don't understand why MTV or other companies would pick the programming they do? Is it because it's "normal" to "hate bush", etc. by the media? Do you think this may affect the music or videos shown on TV?

posted on Jan, 10 2006 @ 02:27 PM
I don't really think we can see the effect to the full extent that we wish we could. How can we measure something that basically we don't even know is happening. I mean we are being told to purchase these dime a dozen records, while we can never measure the work we have been missing out on for who knows how long.

When the beatlemania took hold, did their label tell them to cut their hair? Conform to what our societies standards expected? They were pressured, but they stood up for what they thought and they did what they wanted. And they are the greatest rock band in history. Elvis Presley became a sex icon and will forever be remembered, because he would not conform.

So sure we can blame it on the labels, but we will never know what we are really missing out on until these guys finally stand up and say No! This is what I stand for, this is what I believe.. And I believe in myself enough to think my words will be heard, regardless of what label will and will not promote them.

Optimistic til the end!

new topics


log in