I honestly don't really know if I understood fully what was going on in these chapters- though I'm sure I'm not alone- however, I am making an attempt to answer the question. Haha.
I think was Marcus was trying to say in his quote, was that because history is always changing- things are added and deleted all the time (which is why text books have new editions all the time)- and because it comes down to picking out what was important or not important enough to be written about, that the Sex Pistols' music and time in history could be looked at as just important as a major event in history. And I suppose I can agree with him- though I think it would depend on what major event in history it would be compared to. Because history is interpreted, and never is an objective truth, the music of the Sex Pistols and the events that centered around them (I don't really know much at all about them) can have crucial and important meanings weeded out of them by certain people in certain contexts.
Looked at in the history of music alone, I'm sure that the Sex Pistols can be used as a group to be learned from by musical groups of the present- therefore they serve a similar purpose as a past war would in relevance to the war we're fighting now. I guess history is what you make of it, and by learning about history you can choose to try to learn from it or to just let it go from your mind.
I don't know? ...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
AP: Good start here; these aren't easy concepts to grasp.
I think what you're trying to get at is good, but take it a step further- why would we reconsider the Sex Pistols in 1989, ten years after the record came out? How had its meaning changed over the decade? :EE
Post a Comment