30th Anniversary of Disco Sucks

[Alndln2]

[tremolounge]

Why was disco so vehemently hated? Could there possibly be racism and homophobia lurking not too deeply under the surface... hmmm...?

 

[edit] ...and not to leave the members of the media out... once they got wind of the "Disco Sucks" thing, they certainly fanned the flames for all it was worth.

[Etienne Rambert]

Disco was great music AFAIC. It was an oasis from the barren sands of 1970's guitar Rock.

[Lee Flier]

Why was disco so vehemently hated?

 

Umm... cuz it sucked, of course!

 

Could there possibly be racism and homophobia lurking not too deeply under the surface... hmmm...?

 

Nahhh. Some people (myself included) just thought it was a very watered down, sappy version of funk. Give me real funk and R&B any day of the week. Disco, not so much. Disco was to funk kinda like what 80s hair bands were to metal - all very competently done, and with a fun image, but, meh - it all sounds really castrated and more about the bling and the drugs and a big paycheck than music.

 

Some of it sounds good in retrospect because the records sound really good - pretty much every major release at that time did. They had the money to hire really talented players, and some kick ass engineers and producers worked on that stuff. It's easy to compare it to some of the stuff that's out now and say "It wasn't so bad." But at the time, it was pretty bad. And I still don't really enjoy listening to it. Not when there are Parliament and Meters and Stevie Wonder and EWF and War and all those records from the same era out there.

[spokenward]

 

...and not to leave the members of the media out... once they got wind of the "Disco Sucks" thing, they certainly fanned the flames for all it was worth.

 

 

To give a little context to that particular event - there was a radio format war going on with album rock stations switching to disco. One of those stations that switched formats sacked the eventual host (Steve Dahl) of the disco demolition event.

 

The Veeck family that owned the Sox was media and promo friendly and the event as originally proposed was supposed to be fast and funny. Comedy is fraught with peril. And beer. Beer is fraught with peril.

[halfnote]

Re: Lee's comment just above, while over time I developed a liking for some of what was labeled disco (that cat "Sylvester" was silly but sure could sing), her point is valid.

The diff between disco & funk, you ask?

Disco was like house or techno (or for that matter some other forms of pop), with an unvarying beat whereas James Brown, PFunk, etc., had a roiling, shifting rhythmic nature, expressive & lively.

 

As to the industry pressures that may've underlain this protest, I have to wonder why there haven't been more recent DJ protests about the heavily diminished variety of modern radio playlists , not to mention the almost complete exclusion of DJs with real personality (not yapping "Morning Crews", etc.) & musical awareness.

[tremolounge]

 

Disco was great music AFAIC. It was an oasis from the barren sands of 1970's guitar Rock.

 

 

+1!

[Lee Flier]

 

Disco was great music AFAIC. It was an oasis from the barren sands of 1970's guitar Rock.

 

 

That's kind of silly. Not all 1970s guitar rock was barren, any more than disco was the only alternative. There really was a pretty incredible variety of music that came out in the 70s, all very well produced and recorded too.

[Lee Flier]

The diff between disco & funk, you ask? Disco was like house or techno (or for that matter some other forms of pop), with an unvarying beat whereas James Brown, PFunk, etc., had a roiling, shifting rhythmic nature, expressive & lively.

 

Yeah. Plus it actually had balls.

 

As to the industry pressures that may've underlain this protest, I have to wonder why there haven't been more recent DJ protests about the heavily diminished variety of modern radio playlists , not to mention the almost complete exclusion of DJs with real personality (not yapping "Morning Crews", etc.) & musical awareness.

 

All of those folks want to keep their jobs, given the nature of today's radio biz. That's why there aren't more protests. Back when the DJ had more clout, a popular DJ was rarely worried about keeping their job, and even if they got fired they would probably be picked up by a competing station. So they rarely got fired.

[Lee Knight]

Disco was made for dancing. 70's rock was much less about dancing and more about lifestyle and attitude. When Disco came out, to a rock lover's ears, it made absolutely no sense at all.

 

In retrospect I get it. I even like it now, after going through a Electronica phase, Disco does seems to make more sense. Once again, dancing plays in pretty heavily here.

 

The Disco Sucks movement made sense to a lot of people at the time. "You're making music that doesn't serve a purpose? Except to prance around in those silly ass clothes and get laid? Synthetic fabrics and drums? No thank you. Disco Sucks!"

[tremolounge]

Of course, much of this comes down to taste, and I admit I was trying to be provocative with the oft-repeated charge of racism and homophobia. But as someone who loved and followed black music from the sixties on, I really dug disco at the time, and before the media labelled it, I just heard it as a variation on the soul/dance/funk music of the day.

 

And there are lots of great songs that stand the test of time -- just browse the Rhino 7(?)-volume anthology, "The Disco Years": Turn the Beat Around, Don't Leave Me This Way, Lost in Music, Spacer, Get Down Tonight, I'm Coming Out, Paradise, One More Shot... all the way to the parody, Mindless Boogie (till you drop!).

[Lee Flier]

Disco was made for dancing. 70's rock was much less about dancing and more about lifestyle and attitude. When Disco came out, to a rock lover's ears, it made absolutely no sense at all. In retrospect I get it. I even like it now, after going through a Electronica phase, Disco does seems to make more sense. Once again, dancing plays in pretty heavily here. The Disco Sucks movement made sense to a lot of people at the time. "You're making music that doesn't serve a purpose? Except to prance around in those silly ass clothes and get laid? Synthetic fabrics and drums? No thank you. Disco Sucks!"

 

I dunno. I was lucky enough to go to a very racially integrated school (I was in Jr. High when this was all going on) and was exposed to a wide variety of music. And dancing! There were loads of kids at my school who were into dancing, some who were amazing at it. Most of them didn't like disco either, though they loved to dance to funk, salsa, etc. Maybe I just went to an unusually hip school (I think I did, actually).

 

There WAS also the issue of a rock station or two changing over to disco format, as another poster mentioned. And that pissed off a lot of people of course. So it was a combination of things. I don't think anyone other than a few overly pretentious art-rockers was opposed to the idea of fun music that was made for dancing. That was fine with me - I'll dance to War records all day long. Disco just didn't get my booty shakin', any more than techno does now. Funk was sexy, disco was boring and contrived. To my ears/booty, anyway.

[bp]

[YOUTUBE]I0PamtXZO70[/YOUTUBE]

[halfnote]

Of course, much of this comes down to taste, and I admit I was trying to be provocative with the oft-repeated charge of racism and homophobia. But as someone who loved and followed black music from the sixties on, I really dug disco at the time, and before the media labelled it, I just heard it as a variation on the soul/dance/funk music of the day.

Although for some reason disco's associated with "black music" ( check yer concepts against Joe "Music Ain't Got No Color" Tex) which for some reason is often set apart from rock & roll , it was popular with all sorts of demographics. Sat Night Fever, for example, was set in a very popular & very real Italian neighborhood.

 

The thing that really set many against it was that, at that time, "serious" rock music was all about singer-songwriters & (alledged) progressive bands & fans usually sat around listening closely to those, without dancing.

That despite the fact that one of the most serious, conceptual & progressive outfits of rock history (Parliament-Funkadelic) was both dance-happy & had some of the best post-Hendrixian guitarists ever (Eddie Hazel, Michael Hampton, etc.).

[Lee Flier]

So different from, uh, Mick Jagger, David Bowie, Slade or Kiss ? :poke:

 

Yeah, exactly.

 

Although for some reason disco's associated with "black music" ( check yer concepts against Joe "Music Ain't Got No Color" Tex) which for some reason is often set apart from rock & roll , it was popular with all sorts of demographics. Sat Night Fever, for example, was set in a very popular & very real Italian neighborhood.

 

I don't know how anyone started associating disco with "black music." No one at the time did. And let's not forget the most successful "disco" act was the Bee Gees. It's pretty obvious that the "black music" thing was a revisionist attempt to paint people who didn't like disco as racist, which is just goofy. Plenty of white people listened to funk, and there were lots of funk hits on mainstream pop radio.

 

The thing that really set many against it was that, at that time, "serious" rock music was all about singer-songwriters & (alledged) progressive bands & fans usually sat around listening closely to those, without dancing. That despite the fact that one of the most serious, conceptual & progressive outfits of rock history (Parliament-Funkadelic) was both dance-happy & had some of the best post-Hendrixian guitarists ever (Eddie Hazel, Michael Hampton, etc.).

 

Again, I don't think everybody who listened to rock had anything against dance music per se. As you point out yourself, the glam rock movement was similarly fun, danceable and gender-bending. And plenty of people who liked rock also danced around to Parliament Funkadelic, War, etc. Again, all those guys had big hits with white audiences.

 

I think you're reading too much into this. A lot of people just didn't like disco, and there's not some big underlying reason for it. To most people I knew at the time, it just seemed lame compared to what else was around, plus there were people who were pissed off that rock stations were switching to disco. That's about it. Sure, there was the "serious art-rock" crowd and the "serious singer-songwriter crowd," but that didn't by any means represent all of the "disco sucks" crowd.

[Lee Flier]

Here's one example of what I'm talking about. This was a HUGE hit in 1975. Fun, funky, danceable, not the least bit "serious" or "meaningful" to say the least. Unrelenting groove. I love it. But it's definitely NOT disco, and no one wearing a "Disco Sucks" button would have been referring to this kind of thing.

 

[YOUTUBE]I8mZdSq4MTs[/YOUTUBE]

[Gus Lozada]

 

But you can't dance Travolta-Style to that sh*t ...

[bp]

 

 

 

That tune always brings a smile.

[Lee Knight]

Let me clarify my point. Disco was made solely for dancing.

 

Of course there was R&R and funk dancing. But both those types of music are great to listen to as well. Disco, really didn't have listening in mind during it's creation. Yes, I know people bought it and listened in their cars. They were pop songs too, I'm aware of that. And I understand its value to the listener more today. But the purpose of Disco music is to facilitate dancing!

 

Not so with rock and funk. Though it is a blast to dance to.

 

As to Slade and Jagger wearing synthetic clothes which supposedly negates my point about the shock rock lovers experienced watching their peers geek out on the dance floor in Angel Flight matching slacks and vest with a polyester shirt open to the navel...

 

...I'll take Slade's brand of silliness any day.

[blue2blue]

In the early and mid 70s, I enjoyed the discotheque scene, it was great to go someplace and not have to hear bad covers of ELO and Foreigner, a place where the spinner knew when to put on the Bar-Kays or the Meters and when to stick with James Brown.

 

Especially nice to have that option when it was almost impossible to see a live band in a club environment that wasn't doing covers.

 

But time marches on and when the new music scene started breaking out in '75/'76, the lure of tiny, hole in the wall clubs playing live, outsider rock was pretty much irresistible to me.

 

Disco had all but fallen off my personal map by '77 or so. The once vibrant disco scene I'd participated in '74/'75 had shrunk to almost nothing. The biggest disco in town had shifted to a ladies club. [Not the kind where gay guys stripped for drunken hetero chicks, mind you. The kind where women could hang out together without being annoyed by heterosexual guys.]

 

So I was almost utterly incredulous when, in '78 a major motion picture came out focused on a scene I thought had all but dried up and blown away.

 

What I didn't realize at the time -- but would soon figure out -- this was a natural evolution of cultural artifact adoption.

 

Looking back, I could see how the hippie thing went through the same phases: first the early adopters, the hipsters, really got into and lived inside of the lifestyle. But as more outsiders and newbs came in, it drove out the core people. (Oldsters will remember that the Summer of Love in '67 was followed by a solemn "Funeral for the Hippie" in Haight in '68...) By the early 70s, used car salesmen and cops were growing out their hair and wearing flowered polyester shirts and flare trousers. And the hipsters had fled.

 

Disco went through the same thing.

 

As did punk. In '79, sitting around with friends, I declared punk rock officially "dead."

 

So, you can imagine my bemusement when there was an 80s punk revival, as the K-Martization of punk institutionalized behaviors and costumes into an absurd inversion of the early nonconformity. By the mid-80s, I was horrified to see chains of mall stores selling off the rack "punk outfits" to sheep-like teens and even young adults.

[Lee Flier]

 

Let me clarify my point. Disco was made solely for dancing. Of course there was R&R and funk dancing. But both those types of music are great to listen to as well. Disco, really didn't have listening in mind during it's creation. Yes, I know people bought it and listened in their cars. They were pop songs too, I'm aware of that. And I understand its value to the listener more today. But the purpose of Disco music is to facilitate dancing! Not so with rock and funk. Though it is a blast to dance to.

 

 

I have to disagree... a LOT of funk (I mean the real "skanky" funk, not the "progressive" funk that came later) was created with dancing in mind. And I don't see how you can listen to most of it and NOT want to dance. Disco OTOH doesn't inspire that in me at all, and I think a lot of the Disco Sucks crowd felt the same... disco seemed useless to many of us for either listening OR dancing.

 

Obviously, a lot of other people felt differently, and that's a matter of taste. But funk and R&B definitely had the dance club crowd in mind.

[Kerouac]

"Disco blows dogs for quarters man!"

 

[Bookumdano2]

One of the best times. Lots of people hated it but, hey .. more fun for me at that point. And I came into things way back before that in the early Folk/Hootenanny days of 12 years before even that.

 

73-78 was s-o-o much fun to record that kind of stuff. S-o-o-o much fun to play it. S-o-o-o much fun to do remixes in the studio. For some of us, the days left behind in 71-72 etc (80 minute jams by bazillions of bands that all looked like the Allman brothers) was ... good riddance. Time to put the guitars/bass/drums format away for awhile.

 

I marvelled at stuff Temperton was doing in the studio. Heatwave was incredible. The New York stuff was incredible. It was just a total high most all the time.

 

And the women .... whoa. The atmosphere then.... whoa.

 

I got tired of it by around summer of 79 and was ready for the next thing. Which at that moment began for me to be what the Police were coming up with.

 

But I have no complaints whatsoever. That era was just as cool to live through as the era that started that Sunday night 11 years earlier when I saw the Beatles on Sullivan.

[Billster]

And let's not forget the most successful "disco" act was the Bee Gees.

 

IMHO, it was the whole Saturday Night Fever/Bee Gees thing that killed disco and triggered the "Disco Sucks" backlash. The Bee Gees actually had a career before Saturday Night Fever, just like Paul was in a band before Wings , and wrote some nice tunes. I digress.

 

Disco was just a way of stylizing pop music. If you look at the tunes, there's some catchy stuff. What killed it was everyone sticking the same drum groove underneath, and wearing the open shirts with gold chains and blow-dried chest hair.

 

The same thing could be said about the Seattle grunge thing, where all of a sudden everyone had flannel shirts and greasy hair, and figured you could just put the same guitar part on every song.

[Lee Flier]

IMHO, it was the whole Saturday Night Fever /Bee Gees thing that killed disco and triggered the "Disco Sucks" backlash.

 

Yep.

 

The Bee Gees actually had a career before Saturday Night Fever , just like Paul was in a band before Wings , and wrote some nice tunes.

 

Yep. I actually liked the pre-disco Bee Gees.

 

Disco was just a way of stylizing pop music. If you look at the tunes, there's some catchy stuff. What killed it was everyone sticking the same drum groove underneath, and wearing the open shirts with gold chains and blow-dried chest hair.

 

Yeah, well that and so much of it just plain had no balls.

 

The same thing could be said about the Seattle grunge thing, where all of a sudden everyone had flannel shirts and greasy hair, and figured you could just put the same guitar part on every song.

 

Yep. I agree with blue2blue that you always know the rot has set in when the "corporate machine" co-opts a cultural trend and mass produces it. Unfortunately that arc has gotten shorter and shorter, and most underground scenes right now have practically zero time to incubate before getting eviscerated.