Has pop culture reached a perpetual now? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 12, 2024, 01:22:48 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Forum Community
  Off-topic Board (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, The Mikado, YE)
  Has pop culture reached a perpetual now? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Has pop culture reached a perpetual now?  (Read 1691 times)
Reaganfan
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,236
United States


« on: October 05, 2015, 07:39:07 PM »

Has pop culture reached a perpetual now?

What I mean by that is that we don't seem to have as much trendiness as we used to in styles, culture, ect.

For example, if you go back from today to six years ago in 2009, not much was different. Obama, the Kardashians, similar hairstyles, similar dance/rap music. Kanye, Taylor Swift, ect.

Go back the same amount of time from a different year, like 1985, and so much was different in 1979. Carter vs. Reagan, sideburns and afros vs. big 80s hair, disco vs. 80s rock, bell-bottom pants vs parachute pants.

My question is, why did so much change year by year in the past, but not so much now?
Logged
Reaganfan
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,236
United States


« Reply #1 on: October 05, 2015, 11:29:42 PM »

Wow, I'm so glad you posted this! This isn't a side we've seen from you in a longtime!

I think your criteria is way too selective though. Gaga is no longer popular. A hundred one hit wonders have filled her place.Turnover is so fast, no one can create a long career. Taylor Swift is weird because in a way, she just launched the pop career now.

If you look at country pop, you'll see immense turnover there. Artists used to solidify a place on radio after a strong album, but not anymore...every label is looking for the next big thing and sophomore albums keep completely flunking.

So you're saying that the reason 2009 and 2015 are more similar than 1989 and 1995 or 1979 and 1985 is because the turnover rate on things is so fast it doesn't allow a trend?
Logged
Reaganfan
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,236
United States


« Reply #2 on: October 06, 2015, 12:20:45 AM »

The 00s and 10s in general seem pretty much the same. Each decade seemed to have a much greater degree of difference prior to the 00s. Maybe my generation is just really boring. Tongue

That's what I'm saying. Why? LOL
Logged
Reaganfan
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 14,236
United States


« Reply #3 on: October 06, 2015, 01:31:02 AM »

Lots has changed.  Twitter wasn't much in 2009.  Lady Gaga came and went.  The economy has improved.  Skinny jeans were really just coming in full force in 2009... now they're probably headed out.  The undercut has saturated its way into mainstream.

The real answer is:  You're getting old, Naso.  My parents were born in the late 50s and my mom could never tell the big difference between the late 70s into the 80s.  She'd say "I was too busy having kids and raising them in the 80s to follow pop culture."

It's the way life goes.  I think what is interesting about you is this perpetual surprise at the normal way of things... as if you're the first person to experience it.  I bet you think kids look younger now than they did back in "your day".... .....

I don't think that's it. Even my parents would tell the differences between 1989 vs 1995 or 1992 vs 2000. Now it all seems the same.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.02 seconds with 10 queries.