How not to talk to your kids about Aquanet and '80s music
A couple of weeks ago I went to see Iron Maiden at the outdoor theater I will always know as Pine Knob (just as the corner store at State and William I will always know as Tice’s). I wanted my kids to be impressed, so I told them how a 12-foot zombie named Eddie marched around the stage as the band played their closing song.
They weren’t impressed. Zoe remembers watching my Iron Maiden Rock In Rio DVD, in which Eddie appears five stories tall, with glowing eyes and fake fire. Who cares about a dude in a big zombie suit?
So then I went old school on them. When I saw the band in 1986, I told them, Eddie’s giant alien zombie head rose up from underneath the drum set, and giant zombie hands rose at the edges of the stage, where the guitarists stood on platforms, so that the entire stage transformed into a giant sculptural Eddie who held the band in his arms.
Whoa, they said. Can you show us a video?
This is where I got in trouble - searching for videos with the kids watching over my shoulder. Somewhere in the search results, the word “Cinderella” came up, and Zoe said “what’s that?” before I could scroll past. Naturally, it was video for the ‘80s hair metal band, Cinderella, who you may remember from such hits as “Nobody’s Fool” - which sounds like every other ‘80s hair metal ballad, as I was reminded when my kids made me click the link.
I protested that we didn’t need to see it, that Cinderella was awful, and that I was going to be very upset if I clicked and got “Nobody’s Fool” stuck in my head. But they were adamant, and pretty effective arguers besides: “At least let us see how bad it is.” (Well OK, I thought -- maybe it will be educational!)
They loved it.
Imagine how unpleasant it was for me to type that last sentence. But of course that's where this story was inevitably headed, right? If they had heard the boring beat, the inane guitar line, the appalling screechy-whiny vocals, and said, "Ew!" then there wouldn't be much of a story here.
They loved it. I should have known, because they are contrarians. If I suggest to Zoe she would like a book, she refuses to read it. If I tell Jocelyn that dipping carrots in milk is probably not the ideal way to eat them, she insists they're delicious. So I had almost cornered them by insisting that Cinderella was awful; how could they agree? Especially since the band is called Cinderella. They've learned by now that Dad can hardly be trusted to see rightly when it comes to princess-related issues.
The girls put the impetus back on me: "Dad, why don't you like this?" I had to defend my position. I pointed out the aforementioned problems. For instance, the vocals. But then, I subject the kids' ears to everything from Dead Kennedys to death metal, so I'm on shaky ground there. Also, the drearily unimaginative music. But that's tricky for a 6- and 9-year-old to get an immediate handle on. So I found myself arguing uphill.
I found myself starting to say, Look at them. Don't they look silly?
And the answer is Yes! Yes they do. But I got the feeling, then, that I had chosen a dangerous angle of approach. And I sidestepped by shifting the focus toward their mannerisms, their seriously pouty facial expressions, the singer's schmaltzy hand gestures. Legitimate complaints. Like most proponents of the hair metal genre, Cinderella are absolutely hammy.
But thinking back to the hair metal backlash of the late '80s, what I remember everyone bagging on is the hair, makeup and clothes. Hair metal bands made some of the worst music I've ever heard, it's true -- but so much complaining about them has come because they were men who "looked girly." And when I first began to mention their "look" to my daughters, maybe that's what I impulsively had in mind. Maybe that's what my daughters first picked up on. And both sides of that worry me.
Part of what I wonder is ... why should boys dressing as girls strike me as objectionable? I am all for gender bending. I believe drag is honorable. I think I might enjoy going out in drag myself on occasion if I had any idea where to find pumps in a men's 13. Do I want to tell my daughters that hair bands suck because they're boys dressed as girls? Gadzooks no.
But isn't that what we were bothered by all along, I wonder? But then I think, nah, it can't be - after all, the macho-est jocks at my high school were all into Whitesnake and Poison. So what gives?
Drag queens themselves don't exactly flock to hair metal bands. Why is that? Because the music is so dire? Or perhaps because these pretenders were so haphazard and clueless about fashion that they never came close to looking like actual women? Or because of what they stood for in their songs and videos, the whole groupie-mongering mentality? Is it the way they dressed up girly to appeal to girls, rather than to men? And is that about reinforcing gender paradigms, or breaking them, or both? I find myself in confusing territory here.
So what do I say now to my girls? Do I need to re-examine hair metal, consider it in some possibly coded revolutionary fashion? Was there anything good about it, or is it truly the most hideous musical concoction in the history of earth, as I've suspected?
And how do I make it clear to my daughters why I loathe this music, while also honoring the possibilities of cross-dressing and gender-bending? Of more broadly opposing/transgressing gendered borders?
Are the deeper, trickier aspects of this a conversation for now, or later? And if I say later, am I just being a coward? How will I know when Later becomes Now? Is this the road by which parents fail to talk with their children?
Scott Beal is a stay-at-home dad who plays music in public once in a while.
Comments
Dave
Sat, Aug 14, 2010 : 2:11 a.m.
"I found myself starting to say, Look at them. Don't they look silly?"...says the guy with silly looking hair. Sorry Scott, but when you post that photo of yourself you lose the right to call anybody else silly looking. PS - They didn't look silly, they looked cool.
Lokalisierung
Fri, Aug 13, 2010 : 4:56 p.m.
"It is impossible to defend a genre when its defining feature is that it is terrible, so anything that comes from it, if it is good, must therefore come from a different genre." Well put, and honestly this is where I am coming from. This explains the situation so well that there isn't much more to talk about on that angle.
Jonathan
Fri, Aug 13, 2010 : 10:57 a.m.
@ Lokalisierung: If you think Guns N' Roses wasn't a Glam Metal band, then you must think Faster Pussycat, L.A. Guns, Dangerous Toys, Junkyard, Hardcore Superstar, The Quireboys, Dogs D'Amour, etc weren't Glam Metal bands too, right? I can name you tons of hairbands which didn't sound like Poison. I don't know if you don't want Gn'r lumped there because they had talent or, just like many of their peers, because they had Punk influences. And "record sales and arena sell out" is important if we talk about old acts. Can you name me tons of 80s Rock acts selling out arenas today? Personally I think acts like The Rolling Stones, AC/DC, Bon Jovi, U2, Springsteen are still doing really well because they made quality music. They are not cool anymore, but they are still relevant. Where are most of their peers?
James
Fri, Aug 13, 2010 : 5:49 a.m.
Any debate on hair metal is going to fail on two counts: firstly, it isn't a real genre. Most people suspect they know what hair metal is or think they'll recognise it when they see it, but the term "hair metal" didn't even come in to usage until years after its death where it was used as a term of contempt by those who looked down on it. At the time, fans of that type of music listened to "glam", or "sleaze" or "thrash". Saying you listened to hair metal would have resulted in many quizzical looks. So how can you have a debate about a genre whose name and classification of bands only really exists as a term of abuse? It's like saying, "Yeah, that genre is called "Garbage." Aren't they all terrible? This problem is compounded by the fact that no-one knows what hair metal is. To some it's the likes of Warrant, Poison, Trixter et al. To others it includes Maiden and Judas Priest and AC/DC as they were all appearing in the same magazines at the time. Others also include Whitesnake, Guns N' Roses etc for the same reason, and because they had long hair and played loud guitars. Some, like the guy above, may dispute that Whitesnake are hair metal. But look at their videos of the mid-to late 80s? Are you sure they weren't hair metal? Really? Besides, they all played on the same concert bills, appeared in the same magazines and were played on the same Headbanger TV shows, so if they aren't hair metal, why aren't they? Then of course, even if you can actually nail down what hair metal is, you then have the problem of musical snobbery kicking in (as we have already seen here), whereby something is hair metal until it becomes good..... when it isn't. We see this in all unloved genres - just look at science fiction. P.D. James writes a novel set in a future where men are sterile..... but it isn't science fiction because it's good. Audrey Niffenegger writes a novel about a guy slipping back and forth in time but it's not science fiction.... because it's good. Thank God for the likes of J.G. Ballard who was courted by the literati but was proud to admit that he was an SF writer. And it's the same with hair metal - Whitesnake weren't hair metal because I like them, therefore they are hard rock. Guns and Roses weren't hair metal because I like them, therefore they are something else. Iron Maiden aren't hair metal because, and so on ad infinitum. It is impossible to defend a genre when its defining feature is that it is terrible, so anything that comes from it, if it is good, must therefore come from a different genre. At the end of the day, like most music scenes, there was some great music from that time (WASP, Ratt, Skid Row, Guns and Roses, Vain) and a lot of awful stuff, too. Besides, let's not forget that many of the "cooler" bands of a certain time all have their shameful hair metal origins. Just look at Alice in Chains, Pantera and the like. Hell, even Cobain liked Aerosmith and KISS.
Lokalisierung
Thu, Aug 12, 2010 : 11:32 a.m.
"Yeah the music is horrible.. that's why Appetite For Destruction is the best selling debut album in the US and Bon Jovi is still selling out arenas/stadiums worldwide 20 years after their heyday." I'm actually suprised it took this long to get testy in here, as conversations aboot music quickly do. First off, GNfR isn't a hair metal band, it's pure rock n roll. It took me awhile to figure that out in 87-88, but I finally did. Secondly, and most elementary, record sales and arena sell out do not a good band make. I feel silly even having to explain this, but I have to believe even you know that.
John
Thu, Aug 12, 2010 : 10:17 a.m.
Why was hair metal successful? Many of the bands were masters of the philosophy of 'Don't bore us, get to the chorus'. They wrote songs with hooks and melodies that would have been hits in any genre. I understand not liking the style and a lot of it is pretty vapid, but I can't deny the catchiness of a Living on a Prayer, Nothin' But a Good Time, and especially a Shake Me. That music isn't going to cure cancer, but seeing as how many people turned up at the first Rocklahoma for 4 days of hair hard rock, people do respond to it's simplicity and sing-along-ness that comes with it. I love Iron Maiden, but every tim I pop in Live After Death (my 5 year old's favorite video) i cringe when I see the spandex as much as I cringe at how pretty the four women on the cover of Look What The Cat Dragged in are.
Scott Beal
Thu, Aug 12, 2010 : 12:24 a.m.
We're cool, Mark. I appreciate your thoughtful response. For the record, I thought grunge was pretty fun.
Mark
Thu, Aug 12, 2010 : 12:07 a.m.
Just a quick addendum, I'm not looking to insult you or start a war. I also missed the last few comments before mine, since I was still writing. I think if you do check out Metal Sludge, and particularly the message board, you'll get a lot of insight into the fans and haters of hair metal, metal, rock and just music in general. You'll also probably see some scumbags and people who will make you question why we all share the same air, but that's to be expected everywhere, I suppose.
Mark
Wed, Aug 11, 2010 : 11:46 p.m.
How not to talk to your kids about '80s music: by trying to influence and steer what they want to listen to, and then try to over-complicate things with gender roles. For every band I listen to you with "cred," i.e. Aerosmith, Thin Lizzy, Queen, I also listen to bands that other people may revile, i.e. Ratt, Extreme and Danger Danger. I know the music media (just as bad as the record labels) hold the former group in much higher regard than the latter. But I could care less what a record label, magazine, critic, store clerk, etc, thinks about a band. Ultimately, I make the decision. Which is why I think a band like The Clash is horribly overrated, and that grunge was the next musical movement that the labels milked, then discarded it for "alternative", teen pop and nu-metal. The ever-shrinking recording industry will do that until the end of recorded music. You're an older guy with a mohawk. I'm not going to attack you here based on what you look like, since that's immature and won't further the point. But what does that mohawk tell a total stranger about you? I wouldn't expect to see that on a father of two little girls. I'm not going to automatically give you some kind of credit because you're being "different" or counterculture. I could care less. Honestly, I'm jaded and bitter enough to probably make a snide remark about it. But you're a passing stranger, not the property of a record label and their accountants, either. So I wouldn't dwell on it and I probably won't think about it again. I'm sure it holds special meaning to you, and that is yours and yours alone. I'm not going to try and analyze what your upbringing was like, or what pivotal event caused you to go down the road that led you to your music and style choices. If I did do that, I'd probably be driving a much nicer car and could listen to Van Halen on a much nicer sound system. I never got into these bands, let alone any music, when I was growing up during that time period. I got into these bands as I was leaving high school, 1999/2000. I'm an uncool guy. Terrible social life at high school. So why did I flock to hair metal, instead of punk, or grunge, or death metal? I suppose because overall, it's fun music. Grunge isn't fun, and punk doesn't quite have the sound I'm looking for. I like noisy guitars and powerful, distinctive singing. Songwriting holds some importance too, but there's no denying I enjoy the cheesy lyrics too. I don't want my music to constantly remind me how bad my life, or the world, is. I don't even drink, and I don't look for cheap sex, so I'm even further from the target demographic for hair metal. It's just fun. Maybe I'm living vicariously. Talk to Chuck Klosterman about hair metal, if you want to talk to someone who knows what he's talking about and dissects pop culture for a living. He'll talk all day about this, and probably enlighten you, too.
Scott Beal
Wed, Aug 11, 2010 : 11:18 p.m.
Welcome, Metal Sludge! Part of what makes me wonder, looking back, is that a lot of dudes I knew in high school thought that Cinderella and White Lion looked ridiculous but that Priest and Maiden looked just fine. In hindsight, everyone looked ridiculous, but at the time, all we saw were the differences. What was the source of those differences? Also, for the record, Zoe's favorite band when she was 3 was Iron Maiden. She got hooked on "Wildest Dreams" when Dance of Death came out. Right now her favorite song might be "Sapari" by the Israeli metal band Orphaned Land. So I don't think the stereotypes apply.
Joey Lee Jett
Wed, Aug 11, 2010 : 11:10 p.m.
Uh oh Scott, you've woken up the Metal Sludge messageboard! I grew up in the ear and was/am a fan of all those metal bands - glam, thrash, true, false. It's no secret to me why your daughters are tuning into Cinderella over Maiden - the big beat. Cinderella has it, Maiden has it only on the "The Prisoner", and just at the beginning at that. I always thought of Cinderella as a dressed up version of AC/DC (Brian Johsnon-era only). They had hooks and beats, where as Maiden had epic gallops and soaring anthems. I love both bands! But you might want to give your kids a few years before trying Maiden again. Plus, not to generalize, but Maiden is far more popular with dudes than chicks (don't get me wrong, I know some gals are Maiden maniacs too), and Cinderella is often the other way around. But like Jonathan said above, both bands looked pretty ridiculous, by "normal" standards. My father laughed at all my posters - Judas Priest, Quiet Riot, it was all the same nonsense and equally stupid to him. And that's why, to quote Tom Keifer, who's to care if I grow my hair to the sky.
Scott Beal
Wed, Aug 11, 2010 : 10:53 p.m.
I would never begrudge anyone for defending the music that matters to them. Music has been a central force in my life, and I appreciate how passionate it makes people. That being said -- I remember the era just fine. I'll be the first to say that Iron Maiden frequently looked ridiculous in the 80s, and so did I. And I'll even confess, with only minor chagrin, that I owned Night Songs, and Look What the Cat Dragged In, and plenty more where that came from. And saw Def Leppard in concert on the Hysteria tour. I'm not speaking from a place of ignorance. If I appear to be looking down my nose at hair metal fans, please understand that I'm laughing just as hard at myself. But still -- if you want to debate, it's silly to point to Bon Jovi's, G'n'R's, or anyone else's audience share as a reflection of musical quality. The Eagles are still filling seats too. And so is Miley Cyrus.
Jonathan
Wed, Aug 11, 2010 : 9:59 p.m.
You say the Hair Metal look was "silly". But you listen to Iron Maiden: their members had long hair and tight pants. So what's your point? By the way, most of the hairbands didn't use make-up, I guess you don't remember the era very well? Yeah the music is horrible.. that's why Appetite For Destruction is the best selling debut album in the US and Bon Jovi is still selling out arenas/stadiums worldwide 20 years after their heyday.
Kubrick66
Wed, Aug 11, 2010 : 6:24 p.m.
Cinderella does not deserve to be lumped into a group that includes Warrant and Poison... Where as Cinderella got sucked into the ridiculous hair, clothes and makeup of the 80's... as song writers, and musicians they far outclassed the former. Their music was blues-based and albums contained much more depth if you actually gave a listen.
Lokalisierung
Wed, Aug 11, 2010 : 2:18 p.m.
Sure but it's all in the match ups you make. For every Nirvana there are 10 grunge bands that are just as horrible as Warrent. Nirvana, which I was never a fan of but respect Vig/Albini's production, would be at/near the top of everyone's grunge respect list, and Cinderlla would be at the bottom of the hair band list, IMO a bad comparison. Hard to say who would be at the top, maybe motley Crue which some people are saying where a good band? Twisted Sister? TS was more rock than ballads i guess, but they were still dressed up the same way. Would I take nirvana over Crue, of course. Would I take Crue over Pearl Jam, begrudingly I might....not a pretty choice either way to me. Peronsally if I were to talk about a band like Soundgarden got trapped in the "Seattle thing," I would just call them a metal band. I would say they were more on the heavy than hair side of course. This is all of course my opinion as I am not an expert on Soundgarden. When I listen to it I hear fast loud guitars & a high shreaking voice...which suits a lot of metal.
tracyann
Wed, Aug 11, 2010 : 1:35 p.m.
@Lokalisierung-I wouldn't even put grunge bands in the same category as glam rock/hair bands. Bands like Nirvana, Soungarden, Alice in Chains, and the like were unique until they became mainstream and labeled as "grunge bands". I know bands evolve and change sounds sometimes but listen to Nirvana's "Bleach" CD then listen to "Nevermind" and you can hear the difference. Some bands are awesome until they appeal to the masses, then the music loses something. Glam rock/hair bands were never even good IMO.
Lokalisierung
Wed, Aug 11, 2010 : 11:23 a.m.
"And they actually are on tour this summer (or were), and just playing small clubs." Dude keep it quite or he'll have to take the whole family to see them! :) But then again, I'd probably rather see Cinderella than that Beiber kid. Close call though.
Scott Beal
Wed, Aug 11, 2010 : 11:02 a.m.
Thanks for the responses, y'all. Lokalisierung, your point about the different media landscape these days is well taken. Hair metal really was unavoidable in its heyday. It's much easier to sidestep the garbage these days. I don't necessarily agree with the argument that they're just kids, so of course they like simple, trite music. I think maybe that's what adults expect of kids in many cases, but it's not necessarily what kids want. My daughters like all kinds of music -- if they're picking the CDs, I'm not sure whether to expect They Might Be Giants, Beethoven, Earth Wind & Fire, Orphaned Land, or the soundtrack to Barbie's Diamond Castle. And meanwhile, a whole lot of grown-up folk were buying Cinderella albums in the 80s, and apparently some of them are still going out to catch Cinderella in clubs. So I think it's a matter of taste, aesthetics, critical judgment -- for listeners of whatever age. I'm not really agreeable to the "lighten up/don't overthink" approach, either. The rise and fall of hair metal are a part of American culture, and they tell us something about who we are. Questions about gender roles and norms, especially are high-stakes questions. There was a story just this week about a 17-month old boy being beaten death for acting too feminine: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-rowe/what-it-says-about-us-whe_b_671373.html In light of such events, it's crucially important to pay attention to how we talk to our kids about gender. That's the real reason I find this Cinderella business worth talking about. Otherwise it's just a cute story, and me complaining about bad music again, which I'm afraid is a habit of mine. Thanks again for taking the time to read and comment, y'all.
Rick
Wed, Aug 11, 2010 : 9 a.m.
C'mon. It's just music. You know the old saying everyone's got an opinion! Lighten up. Cinderella may not be the cream of the crop for any rock genre, but they found an audience. And they actually are on tour this summer (or were), and just playing small clubs. We all like what we all like. Some of you may have so-called "superior" musical tastes, and this God-given ability allows you to look down your nose. Music trends come and go. Some seem silly in hindsight. Look at disco. Look at a lot of different genres. But lighten up!
Rob Pollard
Tue, Aug 10, 2010 : 11:58 p.m.
You're overthinking this. You said your kids are 6 and 9. Hair metal has many faults, but one thing it can be is quite fun. Many songs celebrate partying, having a good time, rocking out, etc (though avoid any songs about "Cherry Pie"). The melodies are usually simplistic, but some can be quite catchy, and again, we're talking about a 6 and a 9 year old. Hopefully their not angst-ridden enough for Joy Division yet. Many people who hate hair metal have a lot of baggage associated with it (e.g., your distaste, probably deserved, for "macho-est jocks) from their formative years which just don't matter to kids 25 years after the fact. Those jocks are now holding down a mortgage and 2 kids just like you. So get our your lighter and shout along, "I'm not your FOOOOOL!" Then, after doing that for a while, go put on your London Calling double album for another side of things.
Speechless
Tue, Aug 10, 2010 : 6:47 p.m.
What we hear: "... the boring beat, the inane guitar line, the appalling screechy-whiny vocals... unimaginative...." And then the kids might respond, "Exactly!... Please, dad, let's play it again!!" During a certain age span, a fair percentage of kids seem to get pleasure from hearing simplistic, limited, or outright questionable musicianship and singing. Dismaying as it can be to older teens and adults, it's precisely these qualities which create the endearing appeal. To borrow from IT and software slang, kids don't see these elements as bugs — why, they're features! Going back another 20 years beyond the mid-late '80s, how else can one explain an act like 1910 Fruitgum Company reaching top #5 a few times? They produced basic bubblegum so sugary that you could feel teeth begin to tingle and rot while you reached out quickly to grab the radio dial. Still, at a time when '60s social revolution wafted in the air, when 'cool kids' cued up Hendrix albums, or Beggars Banquet, or Jeff Beck's debut, their little siblings insisted on jumping around excitedly to the strains of "Simple Simon Says."
Lokalisierung
Tue, Aug 10, 2010 : 2:50 p.m.
And just to be accurate in the timeline, those 3 bands were years before hair metal bands.
Lokalisierung
Tue, Aug 10, 2010 : 2:46 p.m.
"These bands influenced other bands to bring in a lot of good bands that became popular in the early 90's." Also a lot of those bands were grunge bands, that where just as bad as hair bands.
ritewngmedia
Tue, Aug 10, 2010 : 2:07 p.m.
The 80's is an example of what happens with other music eras: hair metal was bad pop, causing bands to get together in defiance of this (e.g. Husker Du, Replacements, Sonic Youth, etc.). These bands influenced other bands to bring in a lot of good bands that became popular in the early 90's. This same kind of thing happened in the 70's and earlier this decade.
Lokalisierung
Tue, Aug 10, 2010 : 11:54 a.m.
"You can't control what your kids like; you can only hope their tastes evolve sufficiently that their more inane youthful obsessions are eventually forgotten." Or you're wrong aboot it, that's the scary part. I don't think I'm alone in saying my parents hated most of my music, and they were of course wrong. I don't even want to think of the ramifications of this.
Rasputin
Tue, Aug 10, 2010 : 11:52 a.m.
Scott, you've said a few things that really struck a chord with me. Your kids, like you and me back in the 70s and 80s, are all contrarians; were the Alex P. Keaton of music and will continue our rampage until the very end. For me, it was the complete rejection of American music in favor of British Punk. Bands like the Clash (who were booed when they performed with the Who in Detroit back in 80s), The Damned, Souxie and the Banshees, The Jam, Madness, and many more further galvanized my resistance to US hair metal, metal, and the like. Scott, celebrate the fact that they are contrarians and that you've done your job well.
blahblahblah
Tue, Aug 10, 2010 : 11:49 a.m.
Back then I resented the hair metal bands mostly because they received all the radio play while true metal bands like Iron Maiden, Judas Priest and Metallica (pre-Black album) went completely overlooked. Then when the Grammy's finally added a heavy rock/metal category and they choose Jethro Tull over Metallica? What were they thinking? That's how out of touch the mainstream music biz was with heavy metal bands in the 80's. In terms of any "lasting revulsions", I think MTV and VH1's programming hypes that whole era, ala pop up video, etc., so they will have an excuse to keep playing their archived video collections which cost nothing to produce.
Lokalisierung
Tue, Aug 10, 2010 : 11:39 a.m.
"Do I want to tell my daughters that hair bands suck because they're boys dressed as girls? Gadzooks no." As fjord stated Cinderella should be hated by all children & adults alike because they made horrible horrible music. New York Dolls you could say dressed the same way and certinaly didn't suck. "And I understand those bands have earned plenty of detractors over the past decade. But have they ever inspired the same kind of lasting revulsion that we reserve for bands like Cinderella and Poison and Warrant? And if not, why not?" Well just the music and looks I would say personally yes they do...these bands are just as horrible. But the "lasting revulsion" I would imgaine is different because of the choices of media kids have today. Back when Cinderella and Warrent were "rocking" the world, pretty much all you had was MTV, and they played this garbage a lot. You couldn't really switch to another music channel (or 300+ other channels for that matter)and just watch something else, you were stuck. So I think for someone my age, the lasting hatred was sort of unavoidable. Kids now can download almost any kind of music for free, they can go online and find the group of music/social group they want to be a apart of and communicate with these people, and aren't just generally limited to freinds in their area. This is a massive difference of being stuck at 1 high school with a bunch of Jocks who liked Poison, and then having to go home and watch poison on TV, creating a never ending cycle of D-baggery (although I wouldn't put Whitesnake in the same group as These bands :)
Scott Beal
Tue, Aug 10, 2010 : 9:43 a.m.
I mean, that's what I thought. Thank you. But to play devil's advocate -- if you replace "hair-metal" with "goth-punk", you could just as easily be describing Good Charlotte or My Chemical Romance. And I understand those bands have earned plenty of detractors over the past decade. But have they ever inspired the same kind of lasting revulsion that we reserve for bands like Cinderella and Poison and Warrant? And if not, why not?
Rod Johnson
Tue, Aug 10, 2010 : 9:40 a.m.
Sure, fjord, I have a question. Now that you've restated the premise of the article, what do you think about the actual questions it raises? Good article, Scott.