I think the whole article is too up its own ass, if you get my drift. :lol: It is as flawed as the film it (over) discusses and its one biggest flaw is that it only views Disco from the American perspective.
I understand that the USA was the power house of all things disco and to some extent that makes it the primary source for any interpretations as to what made disco tick, but speaking from a European perspective, the Gay angle especially, would be largely irrelevant. Discos had been in small towns, playing to largely white heterosexual audiences since the early '60s. They were simply the place one went to dance to exotic (black) music and meet people of the opposite sex. Very few Gay discos existed in comparison.
I for one believe that black music was more of an influence on disco music than the Gay movement. O.K. many of the artists were Gay, many of the producers too, but a whole lot of 'em were black first and as such I believe those roots had much more influence on the music they produced. It may have been that the Gays (in the US) accepted their music more openly (at first), but did that mean that none of it was played in Black discos because it was Gay? I don't know. It was certainly played in heterosexual discos all over Europe. I don't think I worried for one moment about the inticasies of why the music was made and what politics were behind it. It was the music that made my audiences dance....simple, really. I accept that's a somewhat dumbass, ignorant view, but that's how I felt. I didn't want to know anything else and nor did anyone else at the time, did they?
If anything, the article shows just how at odds the whole of American society must have been with itself and how insular, racist and corrupt. That's not to say that any other country probably wasn't as bad, but at least the article got one thing right. Nothing happens in America unless there's big bucks to be made. So let's thank the capitalistas for Disco. God Bless 'em. :)



Reply With Quote

Bookmarks