"Integration with the boss" is supposed to elevate your conscience, just as "integration with mtv" is supposed to make you cool. I know this might sound blasphemous for many people, but it's plain and obvious for me that the boss and mtv, different as they seem to be, are really events of the same nature. Is this actually bad? Not at all, or at least, it all depends on what you consider bad. Neither Bruce nor mtv don't exactly make the world topple over; on the contrary, both act as wonderfully stabilising factors in the society. The former quenches the 'spiritual thirst' of the grown-up, making him believe in what he is not, the latter quenches the rebel spirit of the kid, making him believe he is cool when he is actually just dumb. However, if you're looking for progress, advance and true creativity, stay away from both. That's my piece of advice, do what you want with.
Analysis, essay topics to try out
Likewise, dylan's musical philosophy, while on the surface somewhat resembling Bruce's, is in fact vastly different. Both of them sing about 'the small guy but both assume different modalities. Dylan sings about the small guy from the position of a small guy, or, rather, he sings about the small guy being a small guy. In this way, dylan's musical philosophy is hardly acceptable for the average listener who wants the artist to flatter him - dylan isn't a flatterer, he sings about things as they are (I mean, of course, when he's not being psychedelic: these things refer more. Bruce, on the other hand, sings about the small guy from the position of an epic hero, or, rather, he sings about the small guy being an epic hero. This is certainly far more acceptable to the general public, isn't it? It's always nice to hear attempt someone singing about you as if you were a great 'introspective' hero, when in reality you're just a smelly drunk biker. Is the general audience supposed to identify with the message of 'It Ain't me babe'? Never, even if it's actually true. No, the general audience is supposed to identify with the message of 'Thunder road'. In this way, bruce Springsteen is as much of a necessary ingredient for the average working class listener as 'n sync and Britney spears are of a necessary ingredient for the average teenybopper.
Well, you see, the boss essay doesn't leave me a choice. He's all about the philosophy. As i already said, he's never been about the music: Springsteen's strength, like that of Dylan, lies in a) his lyrics, b) his singing and c) the general atmosphere of his records. All of these things relate to musical philosophy. That said, i find Dylan's material generally far more interesting from a purely musical matter, and I can't actually accuse dylan of not having melodies, derivative as they might be, while i'd be hard pressed to memorize at least one or two of the boss's. Well, no, that's a lie. He has his share of melodically interesting songs - the catch is, most of his hooks are quite simple and recycled, and besides, even the most rabid Bruce fan would not claim that his love for the boss stems from the boss writing memorable melodies. The boss is nothing without his voice.
I remember reading an article somewhere that compared Bruce with Frank sinatra: a very insightful article it was, biography too, as there is actually a far more tense connection between the two that you could possibly imagine. Springsteen is the sinatra of rock; deeper, perhaps, and maybe with a larger amount of sincerity and a different 'core audience but the main function of the two is the same - to act as a 'stabilising factor' in American popular art. Now that old pop music is on its way out and rock is slowly taking its place, we can easily" the immortal words of Pete townshend: 'meet the new Boss, same as the Old Boss.' All said, i re-iterate: the world needs its Bruce. But in this case, let's just forget about musical creativity. Are guys like bruce representing the future of popular music? In both cases, the consequences will be both good and bad, so perhaps there's no need to be really bitchin' about. One question that should quite naturally arise out of all this is: why the hell am I so viciously addressing Bruce's philosophy that i even felt a need to write an introduction three times longer than my usual length for intros?
Sure, a lot of his stuff is grim and infused with a sense of darkness, etc. But this pessimism is only superficial, and it hardly digs deeper than the traditional bluesy pessimism (which gets fully explored by the boss on such an album. The 'pessimism' present within Bruce's work isn't really his own; it's taken from elsewhere, borrowed from the bluesmen and stolen from the folkies. But the song begins to belong to Bruce only after he'd stuffed its pessimistic cover with his optimistic content. Take a song like 'meeting Across The river for instance, with its supposedly grim matter. Is it a grim, hard-biting song indeed? I gotta give it to him, Bruce masterfully acts as a 'salvaging guy' in all these cases, transforming potentially depressing material into a song of gentleness and epicness. But whether he means it or not, it is a phony move, a doze of musical opium for the working class.
Oxford English, grammar, course Advanced with, answers
There's a strong religious feeling emanating from the Bruce and his fans relationship, and it's no wonder that Springsteen more often causes a 'love' or 'hate' reaction - you either accept the faith and the epiphany or you indignantly decline. But it is obvious that such a guy as Bruce Springsteen could only appear in the States (although many countries has similar types of expression). His appeal is mostly to people with a stable (not necessarily "happy though) life who are getting sick and tired of their stable life. It's actually a compliment to the American social and economic situation in the seventies that such a conforming dude as Mr Springsteen could appear there and become the nation's superstar. It's also a sign of stagnation: Bruce isn't actually searching for anything new, he's trying to convince you that everything necessary has already interpretation been found. Needless to say, springsteen's music and image is a good sign - i actually welcome the fact that the man did appear on the scene.
I can respect his attitude flight and I certainly acknowledge his talent. But stability and conformism in rock music isn't exactly what I'm looking for, and Mr Springsteen isn't a better specimen in this respect than, say, the eagles. I actually prefer the eagles over Mr Springsteen - both are the epitomy of 'conformist America but at least the eagles wrote slightly better melodies. Plus, for all their faults, the eagles at least had 'hotel California a song that is actually the absolute opposite of Springsteen's life philosophy. Another myth in desperate need of rebuttal is that Bruce is actually a 'pessimistic' artist.
And if you think your life is too simple, you are deeply mistaken - there are problems deep inside yourself you're not even aware of, but all of them can be easily solved if you want. And if you think your life is dull and meaningless, you couldn't be more wrong. Your life is magic, pure magic and mystics. There's so much about it that you don't usually pay attention. With just a little twist of your mind (and a little injection of my songs your dull everyday life turns into a never-ending thrilling journey on an endless romantic highway! You're a hero, you're unique, you can be a superman if you wish.
Just follow my advice.' On first sight, this looks like a beautiful perspective. At last - a spokesman comes up who tells me that I needn't try to escape this life, all I have to do is look within myself and take life as it is, with all its passion and beauty. And look at how smooth and beautiful his lyrics are? Wow, i never thought that a simple day in a simple biker's life can be described in such a glorious way! "In the day we sweat it out in the streets of a runaway american dream/At night we ride through mansions of glory in suicide machines!" Bruce, you're our man. You help us to escape the misery and nightmarish routinenesss of our everyday life by turning us inwards and making us find beauty even within a nightmare - "mansions of glory in suicide machines". We might be simple bikers, or unhappy tramps, or just common working guys with no sense to exist, but here's that sense coming.
RandomProfile - descriptive essay on my mother
Singing with torn jeans and hoarse gps voices to a rudimentary-but-loud accompaniment about the current generation and to the current generation). But parts even so, bruce's general message is quite different from the typical message of a russian rock band. Serious rock'n'roll, as I see it, has mostly been about rebellion or about desperation,. Its two main mottos are 'we gotta get out of this place' or 'there ain't no way out depending on your current state of mind. But Bruce is not really a rebel or a pessimist; he was never thinking of changing the world. He's a typical conformist, and what he usually says - compacted in a very rough, but essentially exact manner, i feel - is this: 'you think you are miserable, mr Working guy? Well then, take a look around you and find out that life as you can know it is beautiful. You were born to run, you were born in the usa, your life is in your hands. Why sit there and complain when you can mount that bike, grab that girl, breathe in the night air and see romance and loftiness in even the ugliest things.
He roars and he screams, he bashes the shit out of his guitar, he requires pompous piano and sax overdubs, thundering drums: he's making his statement loudly. But it's, after all, only a statement. You'll never see bruce without a guitar, but his guitar is just a part of his image, together with the hairy armpits, the sweaty singlet, the dirty torn jeans, and the mini-rambo muscles. The sincere working Man's portrait. I really don't know how much hypocrisy there is in Bruce's overall image - whether he really believes in everything he sings, from. Born to run to, born In The usa, and, frankly, i don't even want to know. He manages to get his message across so that there are no traces of phoniness, and that's. However, i find Springsteen's general aesthetics completely uncompatible with my own (big emphasis on "my own" here, big guy - different aesthetics for from different people). Perhaps it's because a multitude of Russian rock bands, good and original as well as bad and derivative, have unintentionally ripped off Bruce's image (i.
Let us cut the crap at once: Springsteen was. Not about the music (with a few notable exceptions, as usual - 'the e street Shuffle' comes to mind immediately, but then again, dylan did have his 'wigwam boogie too!). Or maybe he was, but not more so than, say, leonard Cohen. About the only musical innovation he could lay claim to was the incorporation of (occasionally annoying, occasionally uplifting) saxophones into the already existing "big band music and even that wasn't so hot by 1973 after the jazz-rock revolution. No, bruce was a singer-songwriter, a spokesman, a poet, a word-wielder: his music was never supposed to be anything but an accompaniment to his poetic vision. Only where cohen's vision was quiet and humble and definitely introspective, thus requiring accordingly humble, soft arrangements, Bruce's vision was grandiose and required grandiose, multi-layered music. Subtlety was never Bruce's weapon - at least, not openly.
I could actually stop right here, because everything that'll follow, both good and bad, will eventually come back to this first sentence, but I suppose i'll have to explain. Frankly speaking, i don't know anything about how much Bruce Springsteen is popular outside of the good old United States. To some extent, probably, mainly due to his grandiose career-supporting events and all kinds of propaganda campaigns and beneficial organisations he takes part. In any case, in my home country people hardly ever know anything about him but his name, and it's one of those rare cases when I feel such an attitude is completely justified. I suppose i'll have to explain again? Springsteen appeared in the States at a time when someone like listing springsteen simply had to appear. The intellectual American public in the mid-seventies had all the 'intellectual' progressive bands to speak up for them (mainly imported ones, of course the elitist underground public had its New York dolls and John Cale and what-not; the raunchy public had its Kiss and its. But what about the working class people, particularly those who weren't entirely satisfied with generic "Southern rock crapola"? People who were so utterly miserable and never had their spokesman who would go one step above singing about beer and booze and "tuesday's gone with the wind"?
Deposit Resume - sop
Bruce Springsteen, bruce springsteen "I work five days a week girl, loading crates down on the dock". Class, c album reviews: discography gaps, disclaimer : this page is not written from the point of view of a bruce Springsteen fanatic and is not generally intended for narrow-perspective bruce Springsteen fanatics. If you are deeply offended by criticism, non-worshipping approach to your favourite artist, or opinions that do not match your own, do not read any further. If you are not, please consult the guidelines for sending your comments before doing. For information on reviewing principles, please see the introduction. For specific non-comment-related questions, consult the message board. For reading convenience, please open the reader comments section in a parallel browser window. Introduction, my general take on Bruce Springsteen could always be night briefly expressed as follows: Bruce is a very local phenomenon.