I finally listened to the new Bon Iver album the other day and my initial reaction was "depressing Steve Winwood music" (a comparison that is probably attributable to a shared fondness for synthesizers and what I refer to as "smooth jazz" horn arrangements). This is not to say that it is a bad album, just that I expected . . . more. Am I missing something here?
I think part of the reason I was underwhelmed was because the band's music was described to me as "folk" which to my mind, automatically precludes the use of synthesizers and most brass instruments. In a society that is so obsessed with labels, mislabeling something creates false expectations and an inevitable sense of disappointment, even if the mislabeled item is, standing alone, rather good. Perhaps generational issues are at play here (has the term "folk" evolved to mean something more than what I thought was the commonly-understood definition?).
Now that I am well into my thirties, I am beginning to sense something of a disconnect between my cultural frame of reference and the dominant popular culture of the day. For example, I saw an indie band on a trip to Montreal during the summer of 2010 that I quite enjoyed (their sound reminded me of Vampire Weekend). However, when I looked up their website I found that they had labeled their style as "glam shoe-gazing." Leaving aside for a moment the fact that "shoe-gazing" is woefully inadequate as a genre description, there was absolutely nothing "glam" about the band's aesthetics or sound. To me, glam is a very specific descriptor, one that conjures up images of either David Bowie circa Ziggy Stardust or particularly cheesy '80s pop/metal bands. How did glam come to be associated with a group of normally-dressed guys in their twenties with nary a sparkle or spangle between them (not even guyliner)? Again I must ask, am I missing something here?
