At first
this article caught my attention because I found it very relatable. I agree that this generation would have an
amazing time putting together the next Woodstock. Music is very important to this generation,
and I think that shows through all the genres we have today. For example, there’s country, there’s rock,
rap, hip hop, R&B, pop, alternative and much more. As the article continues on it talks about
why it is not possible to have another one of these huge music festivals. The reasons seem pretty plausible; young
adults these days don’t have much time for recreational actives due to standardize
testing and also due to the fact that no famous artist would do any of this for
free. They are way too consumed now with
status and money that they would never perform free without any recognition. But as the article goes on, it really starts
bashing today’s music. I thought the
point of the article was to celebrate music, not knock it down? It is offensive
to some people, like me, who enjoy all genres and enjoy the variety in the
culture of music.
Woodstock was a peak in the 60's especially for the Hippy movement, "Come for three days of Peace and Music" and it was the hippy movement that funded the concert. There isn't a big movement out there that is supported by youth and musicians. And while other music was around at the time, Rock was new, and a lot of kids listened it because it was popular and rebellious, and also spread a message. We, as a generation lack that. It isn't just the music that's lacking, it's also the collective will of the generation.
ReplyDelete