I don’t consider myself old… or even much of an adult, but I feel like i’ve long outgrown concerts. It seems like all I read about is fans getting seriously injured and crowds of people too preoccupied video-recording instead actually enjoying the music.
Then go ahead and do it again. My experience in (agreed, small-ish avenues and small festivals) is still the same as it was in the 2000s. If anything, I’ve found people in the metal and synthcore scene to be more aware of each other and care more for those around them.
A lot of things that are posted online are just ragebait.
Stop reading about concerts and start going to them. I just saw Lacuna Coil last night and had a blast. Most people weren’t on their phones either, save for during one song by the supporting band (New Year’s Day) where the singer specifically requested that everyone record it.
Who cares if people are on their phone? I’m watching the show. You do you.
I don’t understand why it matters. Some artists even lose their shit if people are on their phone. Like dude, they fucking PAID for the show. If they wanna miss it, that’s on them. Such a weird thing to care about and waste energy on.
Crowdsurfing only works well if it is clearly telegraphed by the surfer, and willingly accepted by the crowd - think like an enthusiastic trust fall. Given that she’s 5’6, I can’t see how she would have been landed on full force unless there was basically no warning, or the rest of the crowd around her totally bailed (in which case no-one would jump)
I’d argue that a “no crowdsurfing” sign would, for a punk band, be like a red rag to a bull… Given that she’d attended lots of their shows in the past, I think she’d have had a better gauge of how likely crowdsurfing was, sign or no.
I’m not blaming her at all - I meant that she’d have a good idea of whether or not the singer is a crowdsurfer, regardless of a venue sign being present or not. It’s either the singer’s fault for launching into the crowd with absolutely no warning, or the rest of the crowd for seeing the singer coming and scattering from around her.
By the rules, yes, but OP’s is much better. I hate the style of the actual headline. Just state the facts of the article, there’s no need to frame everything like a human interest story.
I use the one that gets auto-suggested. Sometimes I miss that it doesn’t quite match the headline in the article, and sometimes they change the headlines later. I don’t make up my own.
Yeah, I don’t want to gatekeep music, but if it was trying to find some of the vinyl in a record store, I wouldn’t look under “punk.” I’d probably list go to T under alt rock.
Actually, not really. I will give bonus points to an artist/band that adds interesting performance or atmospheric elements, but the music is what should define the musician, not their visual aesthetics.
Grounds Keeper Willy voice * They’re mortal enemies, like punk rock fans and k-pop fans, or punk rock fans and rap fans, or punk rock fans and punk rock fans… DAMN PUNK ROCK FANS, RUINING THE PUNK ROCK FANDOM!!!
Punk is, to a degree, about deconstruction of a system. If ‘the system’ is built upon an appearance of aggression - angry ten foot tall brodozers and music about shooting anyone who looks at you funny - then the most punk thing to do is to dress up nice and talk about friendship, right? After all, “The Man” wants me to be an avatar of anger so, fuck him, let’s sing about flowers and shit.
But, they’re certainly not “punk rock”, that’s for sure.
I’ve never heard of trophy eyes before, but unless you’re a big act most of these bands take home less than say, a white collar job. And odds seem good they’ll get sued too. So I’m not surprised they’re not throwing cash around
Add comment