Date: Thu, 28 Apr 1994 16:30:38 -0500 (CDT)
From: Tad Kepley <tkepley-AT-bigcat.missouri.edu>
Subject: Re: "Rave" Not an Effective (or Meaningful) Counter-Culture Movement (fwd)




On Thu, 28 Apr 1994, Whit Blauvelt wrote:

> > ...."Rave""culture""politically ineffectual"? Surprise surprise. So
was > > Disco, wasn't it? That is, I mean, "politically ineffectual",
y'know? > > There's only so much rebellion to be found (allowed?) in the
manner in which > > one consumes pop-culture....  Tad > > Disco was of
overtly corporate manufacture (after its first year as an > underground
phenom). Raves may have their entrepreneurs, but have hardly > been
assimilated by Sony. > > For a perspective opposite yours, see the cover
story in May's Wired on > "Zippies" in England - the premise is that
government opposition to > formerly fractured outside-the-norm scenes has
forged them into something > unified and stronger there. > > Just because
culture has had its failures and cooptions, doesn't mean > culture can't
be real. And I can't begin to guess how you'd envision any > real progress
from the present state of things which doesn't enlist > cultural forces.
Saying, "The system will always win; there's nothing we > can do" is
exactly what the system wants youto say.. > > Whit >


FIRST, don't put words in my mouth. That's the first stunt of someone who 
doesn't have anything to say themselves...


SECOND, "kultur" is bunk, (it has ALWAYS throughout history been the
BASEST of commodities...) just like history. If you want to play the
pedant, yeah sure, our language is part of our culture, and will be one of
few tools used in our summary execution of- oops- our opposition to the
fuckers who need to be opposed. False opposition of a spectacular nature
is what I'm talking about here, and you should know it- which is exactly
what any ideologically consumptive and anemic "subculture" is, when you
get right down to it- no matter what particular form of "revolutionary"
rhetoric is being paid lip-service this week. and the system certainly
isn't threatened by idiots dancing til dawn for world brotherhood. The
only real "opposition" to lame underground, fractured scenes on the
"system's" part has been out of confusion or sheer boredom, not genuine
fear. (Say for example, the now forgotten vendetta against punk-types in
SoCal circa late '70's early 80's by LAPD. Eventually, your average FLAG
show was used as a training exercise by cops with nothing better to do-
there was a full blown riot at damn near EVERY SHOW- something this
ominous RAVE thing has yet to accomplish) It's always fun to IMAGINE
repression, and "culturally"  (there's that cuss-word again) marginalized
elements entertain themselves thusly. After fantasizing about it, they
believe it. Then they get smug about it. THEN they've been coopted, by
their own simplistic self-definitions- or by the definitions of the
academic hacks who'll write their histories. "Rave" is about as important
as "punk", whatever that was. 

THIRDLY, if SONY hasn't glommed it yet, certainly doesn't mean it won't.

TAD KEPLEY


     ------------------