Cash Still Rules [NP]

[Paul Mackin]

Heck, I'm not saying Springsteen doesn't truly feel, even after all these
years and all the millions, the discontents small town ordinary Americans
feel about their lives (along with the very good things they also
usually feel). But why praise him for it? Or go ahead and  praise him if
it feels good. It doesn't hurt anything. I just think it's a bit
gratuitous. Whatever he's doing and has done serves him well. What does
he care if he shocks a few innocents now and then. Even a 
President (as if that were possible). Especially a President. In America 
funning with the President and shocking everyone else is totally  de
rigour especially in the presence of youth. And he's not expressing
dangerous ideas or inciting violence. Or is he? Any more that the most
innocuous group one can imagine. Feeling well orchestrated discontent is
actually quite calming. If I wanted to be perverse I could argue it was
counterrevolutionary but that would really be silly. Of course I may be
wrong. And of course I probably know less about current or recent American
pop music than anyone else on the p-list and should keep my mouth shut
about such things but I didn't so must give some kine of an explanation.
No, I know no one is asking me to explain anything. Thomas's post was very
fair and no doubt contains good points.

				P.  

On Tue, 25 Jul 2000, Thomas Eckhardt wrote:

> >Nothing against Bruce for trying to make a living but don't give him too
> >much credit for merely telling the fans what they want to hear.
> 
> I don't think the people, mentioned by jbframe, who misunderstood "Born in
> the USA" as a national anthem would be very pleased by "Nebraska" or "The
> Ghost of Tom Joad" (in Germany Springsteen, ever since "Born in the USA",
> has been looked upon by the "hip crowd" as a musical phenomenon akin to
> Sting and U2; one wouldn't dare to mention that there's a Springsteen record
> in one's collection) The NYPD certainly was less than pleased when he began
> to perform "American Skin (41 shots)" in concert. 
> 
> Springsteen on those records almost never openly expresses political views
> (as far as I know he rarely does it in public, one important exception being
> the moment when he told Ronald Reagan that, no, "Born in the USA" was not
> meant for him to raise his fist to), yet his story songs mostly deal in a
> harsh way with what can happen to people's lives under the current economic
> system, divided by the social and racial boundary lines which are essential
> to its functioning. Just listen to "The Line". Yeah, one might say, his fans
> want to hear these stories about people "like you and me" having a hard
> life, so they can identify and will buy his albums, and besides, he's a
> multi-millionaire, so how can he possibly write songs from the perspectives
> of factory workers, illegal Mexican immigrants, highway patrolmen etc.?
> Well, Flaubert was not Madame Bovary, either. What it comes down to for me
> are perhaps things as oldfashioned as artistic integrity, a sense of social
> responsibility (and I believe it can't be denied that Springsteen's music
> has an influence upon people who do not share the political views one might
> find expressed in his songs); they may be there for the loud guitars and the
> saxophone, but they also get something else), and, most important, I like
> his songs (in the lesser ones he indeed gets far into kitschy territory, in
> his better ones he, IMHO, gets beyond "merely telling the fans what they
> want to hear, i.e. he takes risks).   
> 
> Thomas 
> 
>