The best darn festivals of 1992 … and 1989
… will be held at the Chicago-only Lollapalooza (Beasties, Depeche, Jane’s) and Coachella (Paul McCartney, the Cure, MBV, and Morrissey) (I’m averaging) this summer.
In fairness, the second night of Coachella has the Killers headlining, with Theivery Corporation, TV on the Radio, Fleet Foxes and Band of Horses, roughly, second billed. (Amy Winehouse has cancelled.)
But the balance of both lineups is otherwise pretty pathetic.
I’m trying to think back… when I was twenty, would I have been clamoring to endure a dusty and crowded mess of folk in the desert to see bands that were big when I was barely out of kindergarten?
These festivals … all those reunion tours … this sad practice of playing some album from the past in order ….
(”Oooh—Sonic Youth is going to play ‘Teenage Riot’ … and then ‘Silver Rocket’ right after it!“)
… are we reaching some sad decadent place, where a new generation is being told that this is quality entertainment?Why is it cool to populate these allegedly hip fests with artistically moribund nostalgia acts?
I mean, I’ve seen Paul McCartney. This is a guy who, in 1976, thought it was an inspired bit of stage patter to say, in the course of introducing his band, “This is my wife, Gertrude Higgins” (yuk, yuk) … and to keep using it the next time he toured, in 1989.
Did I miss the discussion of how retro this lineup is on Pitchfork, or is “strong lineup” all it had to say?
3 Comments so far
Leave a reply
I wouldn’t go anywhere near Coachella unless I had access to an air-conditioned trailer with a working shower. In the end, I don’t think the draw of these festivals was ever really the music. It was the *event.* And people love to be around for events.
I think the real truth behind this nostalgia glut is that modern music is fragmented. There are no *new* crossover superstars. The Killers are close. But who else? Arcade Fire? Not really. Kanye West? Maybe. It’s an easier bet for these festivals to go for the other big names, even if they’re not very relevant to our modern times.
It’s the same world where songs by these acts - and not by new acts - are disseminated via Guitar Hero and Rock Band video games. Where these same songs are song on American Idol. Rock is now rehash, that’s all it is.
The playing the record song-by-song thing is totally symptomatic of this half-life syndrome…only old people even remember records, and want it played song by song. It’s the ultimate oldies thing.
Festivals are (pardon me while I quote myself) an attempt on the part of audiences everywhere to participate emotionally in history - that is, a kind of faux history which they have pieced together from mis-remembered aspects of Woodstock and (early) Lollapalooza.
If you think it’s sad that bands are playing full albums - even if they’re really, really great ones like Daydream Nation or Vs. - I’d suggest just not attending? I’m a bit younger, but it was pretty fantastic to see those live. I guess I’d be a little dismayed if most sets weren’t predictable anyway (not in a bad way, just: crunchy catchy 3 minute opener, another crowd-pleasy warmup, a few new ones, a hit, a deep cut or two, a few more popular ones, a ‘brand new’ song they just wrote the night before in your local hotel, then in general what you’d figure would be the last 5 or so songs are…yep, usually the last 5 or so songs). But it seems live music adheres to the above pattern, so what’s the harm in promising ahead of time that you’ll be working with your best material?
Along the same lines, I always scoffed at the Greatest Hits Live conceit - until I saw Iron Maiden play all the hits…
My reaction to gina who thinks festival goers are attempting to get in on some emotionally charged historical moment: I think it’s a lot simpler, really, in that a lot of people find it a convenient place to get really wasted and stumble in between a lot of different kinds of music. Which is a pretty good way to spend a weekend if you aren’t too busy thinking of reasons why people who go are suckers.