utterly forgotten but NOT OBSCURE

[dubdobdee.livejournal.com]

by terming david byrne "obscure", alexmacpherson touches the exact, interesting nerve i think -- maybe even more than with his legendary "why SHOULD i have heard of john wayne?" argument

which is that in every generation (wait, that's how BUFFY starts!! -- er er focus) in every generation there are figures very well-known to all who have just VANISHED from mainstream radar by the next cycle

it's not that they're still popular but currently unfashionable; it's more that "what they meant" is no longer part of the pop discussion -- is that right?

so why has byrne vanished this way? or is it just not making "the right kinds of records" any more?

(disclaimer: i LOVED LOVE LOVED early TH and have i think every record they made --- BUT i went off them INCREDIBLY fast, round abt "true stories", and it took me years to rediscover any fondness)

Comments

[mooxyjoo.livejournal.com]

i don't know about the accuracy of applying this principle to byrne but why not try it out?: maybe he has become more obscure not for like world-historical reasons or just because his creative powers declined, but because he began pitching his efforts too directly at his existing fanbase i.e. meal ticket - the listeners who established artists can invariably count on continuing to buy their records ten years after anyone else thinks they are worthwhile or relevant (and, also, the listeners who weren't there the first time around but who get roped in by all the praise for the historical figure releasing a new record).

i guess this is a way of asking you to be more elaborate about the various possible causes.

also i think british/american asymmetries are complicating this discussion.