Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by JonnieCache 4533 days ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_capital

T'was ever thus.

Don't forget that acid/tekno/jungle was itself stepping on other peoples' shoes, namely the UKs established dancehall/ragga soundsystems:

http://www.uncarved.org/blog/2004/06/4/17/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m-o_N9rCujM

EDIT: jungle was also briefly referred to as "future ragga"! imagine how many people that must have pissed off, even in '92:

http://www.djhistory.com/features/ragga-techno

That article reads exactly like one written today about dubstep or whatever, except with less pessimism. Which is understandable I guess, it must have been hard to be miserable writing about hardcore rave music in 1992.

1 comments

Makes me think of the Clash dissing Paul Weller and the Jam for not being punk ("they got Burton suits, they think it's funny, turning rebellion into money"). That tension between style and righteousness.
This is on Wikipedia, but there's no source: "...a jibe at an unnamed group who wear Burton suits, taken by many to be The Jam (though in an NME article of the time, Strummer claimed the actual target was the power pop fad hyped by journalists as the next big thing in 1978) and the lyric concludes that the new groups are in it solely to be famous and for the money."

I also thought it was aimed at the Jam, as it was right after they (the Jam) announced they were voting conservative.

However, looking back... well, the Clash also turned rebellion into money. They of course kept themselves more real, and they were way less packaged, but still.

About Weller voting Tory, I don't see it. He was just being irascible. None of the songs from In the City read as Tory, rather the opposite.